Canton v. U.S. Foods, Inc.

Background

Brian Canton sued U.S. Foods, Inc. over alleged employment discrimination, retaliation, and constructive discharge under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Canton alleged that U.S. Foods promoted less-qualified White employees over Black employees, retaliated after he complained, and constructively terminated him. He sought damages for emotional distress, economic losses, and lost wages.

U.S. Foods served subpoenas seeking Canton’s medical records from therapist Damien Terronez, LCSW; People Assisting the Homeless (PATH), which the parties described as affiliated with Terronez; podiatrist Jack Harvey, DPM; and general practitioner Michael Alper, M.D. The original subpoenas generally sought all medical records from January 1, 2018, through the present. U.S. Foods later narrowed the time period for the subpoenas to Terronez and PATH.

The court treated the parties’ joint discovery statement as Canton’s motion to quash, meaning a request to cancel or limit the subpoenas, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. By the time of the ruling, U.S. Foods had received records from all three providers except for a January 15, 2022, therapy intake form that Canton had produced with redactions.

Legal standard

Discovery generally includes nonprivileged information that is relevant to a claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. A court must modify or quash a subpoena that requires disclosure of privileged or otherwise protected information when no exception or waiver applies.

The court explained that medical privacy rights may be waived when a party places medical information at issue, but any waiver is limited to private information relevant to the lawsuit. A general claim of emotional distress does not by itself waive medical privacy. A waiver may occur when a party claims physical or mental-health injuries and seeks damages for them. The court must balance the need for the information against the asserted privacy right.

Timeliness and mootness

The court rejected U.S. Foods’ argument that Canton’s motion was untimely. Canton objected shortly after the subpoenas were served, the parties met and conferred, U.S. Foods amended two subpoenas, and the parties submitted the dispute to the court on March 24, 2023. The court concluded that Canton acted within a reasonable time after informal efforts to resolve the dispute.

The court also rejected U.S. Foods’ argument that the motion was moot because the records had already been produced. The court relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45’s procedure for material produced despite a privilege or protection claim. Because the parties still disputed U.S. Foods’ ability to use the records, the court proceeded to decide the objections.

Therapist Terronez and PATH

Canton intended to rely on Terronez’s records to prove damages and might call Terronez as a witness. The court therefore found that Canton had placed the contents of those records at issue. It ruled that the January 15, 2022, intake form had to be produced in full and without redactions. U.S. Foods was also entitled to records held by PATH concerning Terronez’s treatment of Canton.

Podiatrist Harvey

Canton had disclosed that he was diagnosed with gout that he attributed to stress, although he stated that he was not seeking damages for gout. The court ruled that U.S. Foods could review Harvey’s records concerning treatment of Canton’s gout because U.S. Foods was entitled to explore any relationship between the gout diagnosis and the emotional distress Canton attributed to U.S. Foods’ conduct. The protective order in the case was sufficient to address Canton’s privacy concerns.

General practitioner Alper

The court found no dispute that U.S. Foods could review Alper’s records concerning Canton’s ongoing stress and stress-related leave. But U.S. Foods had sought Alper’s complete medical file, including annual checkups, ailments, screening tests, charts, sexual-health history, and medications. The court found that request overbroad and based on generalized speculation rather than a specific showing of relevance.

The court denied U.S. Foods’ present request for Alper’s complete file. The denial was without prejudice as to U.S. Foods’ ability to subpoena additional records if later discovery, such as deposition testimony, showed that more records were needed to support its defenses. Because U.S. Foods had already received Alper’s records, it had to provide a copy to Canton’s counsel for review and then destroy the specified information and all copies in its possession. After doing so, U.S. Foods could issue a narrower subpoena seeking records related to Alper’s treatment or consultation concerning Canton’s mental health, stress-related conditions, and gout diagnosis, from January 1, 2018, through the present.

Disposition

The court granted in part and denied in part Canton’s motion to quash. Canton was ordered to provide U.S. Foods with the complete, unredacted January 15, 2022, intake form concerning Terronez’s treatment within one week of the order. U.S. Foods was ordered to file a declaration confirming that it had served Canton’s counsel a copy of the Alper records and destroyed all copies in its possession within one week.

The signature identifying the judge is not legible in the provided opinion text, so the judge is identified here as the court.