State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Elite Health Centers Inc. et al

Filing 279

[CORRECTED] ORDER granting in part and denying in part Non-Parties' 180 MOTION to Quash and for Protective Order Regarding State Farm Subpoenas filed by Kenneth Jackson--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil) Modified on 8/7/2018 (MWil).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
STATE FARM MUTUAL
AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 2:16-cv-13040
District Judge Sean F. Cox
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti

v.
ELITE HEALTH CENTERS, INC.,
ELITE CHIROPRACTIC, P.C.,
ELITE REHABILITATION, INC.,
MIDWEST MEDICAL
ASSOCIATES, INC., PURE
REHABILITATION, INC., DEREK
L. BITTNER, D.C., P.C., MARK A.
RADOM, DEREK LAWRENCE
BITTNER, D.C., RYAN MATTHEW
LUKOWSKI, D.C., MICHAEL P.
DRAPLIN, D.C., NOEL H. UPFALL,
D.O., MARK J. JUSKA, M.D.,
SUPERIOR DIAGNOSTICS, INC.,
CHINTAN DESAI, M.D., MICHAEL
J. PALEY, M.D., DEARBORN
CENTER FOR PHYSICAL
THERAPY, L.L.C., MICHIGAN
CENTER FOR PHYSICAL
THERAPY, INC., and JAYSON
ROSETT
Defendants.
_________________________/
CORRECTED ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART
NON-PARTIES KENNETH JACKSON’S AND K JACKS INVESTIGATIVE
CONSULTING’S MOTION TO QUASH AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
REGARDING STATE FARM MUTUAL’S BANK SUBPOENAS (DE 180)

This matter is before the Court for consideration of non-parties Kenneth
Jackson’s and K Jacks Investigative Consulting’s (collectively, “Jackson”) motion
to quash and for protective order regarding State Farm’s subpoenas issued to Bank
of America and Citizens Bank (DE 180), Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile
Insurance Company’s (“State Farm Mutual”) response in opposition (DE 222), and
the joint statement of resolved and unresolved issues (DE 266). Judge Cox
referred this motion for hearing and determination (DE 200), and a hearing was
noticed for August 3, 2018.
On the date set for hearing, attorneys Justin Haas, Kathy Josephson, Michael
Rosensaft and Matthew Allen appeared in my courtroom and the Court entertained
oral argument regarding the unresolved issues.
Upon consideration of the motion papers, stipulations placed on the record
and oral argument of counsel, and for all of the reasons stated on the record by the
Court, which are herein incorporated by reference, Jackson’s motion to quash and
for protective order (DE 180), as narrowed by the August 1, 2018 statement of
resolved and unresolved issues (DE 266), is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED
IN PART as follows:
1. The motion to quash and for protective order pertaining State
Farm Mutual’s subpoena to Bank of America is DENIED as
moot because Bank of America has represented that it does not
2

have any documents pertaining to the bank account identified in
the subpoena served on it by State Farm Mutual.
2. The motion to quash as to Citizen’s Bank is DENIED as
untimely filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(2)(B) and (3).
The subpoena was issued to Citizen’s Bank on April 23, 2018
(DE 180 at 38-42), and counsel for Jackson received notice of
the subpoena on May 17, 2018 (DE 274), but did not file the
instant motion to quash until June 8, 2018 (DE 180). Although
counsel for Jackson served “written objections” to the subpoena
on May 31, 2018 (DE 222-2), those objections were so vague
and general as to amount to no objection as all. See Strategic
Mktg. & Res. Team, Inc. v. Auto Data Sols., Inc., No. 2:15-cv12695, 2017 WL 1196361, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 31, 2017)
(“Boilerplate or generalized objections are tantamount to no
objection at all and [should] not be considered by the Court.”)
(citation omitted).
3. Further, the banking records sought in the subpoena are not
protected by the attorney-client privilege or the Michigan
investigator-client privilege, MCL 338.840, because they do not
constitute communications with an attorney, communications
from a client to the investigator, or “information secured in
connection with an assignment.” Moreover, the records sought
are relevant and proportional to the needs of the case.
4. Jackson is not permitted to review the documents produced
pursuant to the subpoena prior to production of the documents
to State Farm Mutual.
5. The parties have agreed to file a supplement to the Stipulated
Protective Order governing this matter (DE 82) by Friday,
August 10, 2018, that will allow “interested persons” to
designate documents as “Confidential” pursuant to paragraph 2
of the Stipulated Protective Order (DE 82, ¶ 2).

3

Finally, the Court declines to award costs to either side.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 7, 2018

s/Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record
on August 7, 2018, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail.
s/Michael Williams
Case Manager for the
Honorable Anthony P. Patti

4