Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Alcaraz Valdez v. Mears Group Inc

United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lafayette Division

December 12, 2019

RUTH SELENE ALCARAZ VALDEZ ET AL
v.
MEARS GROUP INC ET AL

          JUNEAU JUDGE

          MEMORANDUM RULING

          PATRICK J. HANNA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Discovery by Dr. Henry Eiserloh (Rec. Doc. 31) and Defendants' Motion to Quash Subpoena to Dr. Eiserloh (Rec. Doc. 26). Defendants opposed Plaintiff's Motion to Compel. (Rec. Doc. 36). Plaintiff replied (Rec. Doc. 44). Considering the evidence, the law, and the arguments of the parties, and for the reasons fully explained below, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel is granted in part and denied in part, and Defendants' Motion to Quash is granted in part and denied in part.

         Factual Background

         Plaintiff, Ruth Valdez, filed this lawsuit after she was allegedly injured in an auto accident with Jason Price, an employee of Mears Group, Inc., and insured by Old Republic Insurance (all Defendants herein). Defendants retained Dr. Henry Eiserloh to conduct an Independent Medical Exam. Prior to the IME, Plaintiff issued a subpoena duces tecum to Dr. Eiserloh, seeking production of the following contested documents:[1]

1. All written agreements or contracts between you and the defense attorney who retained you both in connection with the captioned lawsuit as well as any other matter in which you have been retained by said attorney in a professional capacity.
5. A certified copy of your entire file concerning the plaintiff including, for example:
a. Communications in any form to include, for example, facsimile, Federal Express, United States Parcel Service, U.S. Mail, electronic mail sent and received by your or anyone acting for you;
c. Letters and correspondence by you and to you from anyone about plaintiff before and after you examined her;
f. Models, illustrations, photographs, exhibits, time lines, medical summaries, or documents of any kind that you intend or contemplate using to explain, illustrate or support your testimony, whether in deposition or at trial of this matter; g. And other thing that you have in your file, possession, or under your control in any way relating to plaintiff.
6. A list of each document, record, or thing that the defense attorney gave you before you met with, interviewed, examined, and tested plaintiff.
7. If different from No. 6, a list of each document, record, or thing that the defense attorney gave you after you met with, interviewed, examined, and tested plaintiff.
8. A list of all documents and materials that you requested from the defense attorney before and after you interviewed, examined, and tested plaintiff.
11. A list of each plaintiff- including the court, the caption and docket number, and the parties' names -in which defense attorney, including Douglas Williams, Christopher Mason, and any member or representative of the law firm sent you to examine as an IME doctor [since June 2018].[2]
12. A list of each plaintiff- including the court, the caption and docket number, and the parties' names - in which a plaintiff attorney or law firm you to examine for a second ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.