Garzon v. Jofaz Transportation, Inc.
Filing
37
MEMORANDUM ORDER granting 36 Motion to Compel. c/m to pro-se plaintiff. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Viktor V. Pohorelsky on 5/15/2013. (Newton, Joan)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-----------------------------------------------------------x
PIEDAD GARZON,
Plaintiff,
-v-
MEMORANDUM ORDER
CV-11-5599 (RRM)(VVP),
JOFAZ TRANSPORTATION, INC.,
Defendant.
-----------------------------------------------------------x
By letter dated May 10, 2013, the plaintiff has asked the court for guidance
concerning the information she is required to produce concerning medical treatment she has
received. The plaintiff is under the impression that she is only required to provide
information concerning mental health treatment. In response, by letter dated May 14, 2013,
the defendant seeks an order directing the plaintiff to provide information concerning all
medical treatment she received, not limited only to mental health treatment.
The court’s previous orders specifically state that the plaintiff is to provide
information concerning all medical treatment she has received. The court’s minute entry
concerning rulings made at the conference on April 18, 2013 provides as follows:
By May 2, 2013, the plaintiff will provide the defendant with a list of the
names and addresses of each doctor, psychologist and psychotherapist who
has treated her since January 1, 2007.
Minute Entry, Apr. 18, 2013 [DE 33] (emphasis added). By using the word “doctor,” the
court intended to include all medical treatment within the scope of the plaintiff’s obligation.
Moreover, the ruling contains no limitation on the type of treatment the plaintiff received. It
states that the plaintiff is to provide the names of everyone who treated her.
The court’s confidentiality order concerning records of treatment is similarly broadly
worded. The order provides, in pertinent part,
All records of medical and psychological treatment received by the plaintiff
which are obtained by the defendant during the course of this action are to be
maintained in strict confidence such that they are to be limited to review by
attorneys only.
Confidentiality Order, Apr. 18, 2013 [DE 34] (emphasis added). That the court used the
word “medical” in addition to “psychological” in describing the records of treatment that are
to be subject to the order, the court contemplated that the plaintiff would be providing
records of all treatment, not only mental health treatment.
Accordingly, the plaintiff is again directed to provide the defendants’ counsel with the
names and addresses of all providers of medical and psychological treatment she has
received since January 1, 2007, and to sign authorizations for the records of those providers
once the defendants’ counsel have prepared the authorizations for her signature. The names
and addresses are to be provided by May 29, 2013.
In accordance with the foregoing, the defendants’ motion is granted.
SO ORDERED:
Viktor V. Pohorelsky
VIKTOR V. POHORELSKY
United States Magistrate Judge
Dated:
Brooklyn, New York
May 15, 2013
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?