Jones v. Sunbelt Rentals, Inc.

Background

The plaintiffs brought a wrongful-death action against Sunbelt Rentals, Inc. and DC Solar, Inc. The complaint alleges that negligence involving a motor-vehicle collision on September 5, 2020, caused the death of Jacoby Jones, Sr. The plaintiffs asserted California-law claims for wrongful-death negligence and negligence based on the decedent’s surviving claims. The parties stipulated that the plaintiffs were no longer seeking economic damages.

The discovery dispute concerned three subpoenas that Sunbelt issued to healthcare providers for minor co-plaintiff R.J.: Koinonia Family Services, Seneca, and Kaiser Permanente ROMI. The subpoenas broadly sought medical, psychological, psychiatric, medication, substance-use, and related records, with requests reaching back to 2013 for Koinonia and Seneca and to 2006 for Kaiser. Sunbelt argued that the plaintiffs had placed R.J.’s mental health at issue by describing his sadness, irritability, anxiety, and mental-health treatment after his father’s death. Sunbelt also argued that R.J., through his guardian ad litem, had waived patient-physician and patient-psychotherapist privileges.

The plaintiffs stated that they were not seeking emotional-distress damages, economic damages for medical consultations, or damages based on psychiatric diagnoses. They also represented that they would not rely on medical records from the providers, medical or mental-health witnesses, or expert testimony about R.J.’s mental health. They reserved only the ability to offer testimony from family members and family friends about R.J.’s response to losing his father as evidence of the relationship between R.J. and the decedent.

Court’s Analysis

Because the case was in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, the court applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 to determine the scope of discovery. That rule permits discovery of nonprivileged information relevant to a claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. California law governed the asserted medical and psychotherapist privileges.

The court held that Sunbelt’s demand for all of R.J.’s medical and psychological records, including records concerning substance use and the medical histories of blood relatives, was not relevant or proportional to the claims and defenses as narrowed by the plaintiffs’ disclaimers. The court noted that California wrongful-death law does not allow recovery for emotional distress, grief, or sorrow, and that the plaintiffs had disclaimed damages based on medical treatment or psychiatric diagnoses. The court also found that Sunbelt had not provided sufficient evidence connecting the requested records to the issues in the case.

The court found the Koinonia subpoena unsupported by reasonable relevance, in part because Sunbelt had inaccurately characterized a six-page document as medical and psychological records from Koinonia. The court also found the Kaiser subpoena unsupported because the document relied on by Sunbelt did not mention Kaiser and the plaintiffs disclaimed any intent to rely on Kaiser evidence. The court further found the subpoenas’ subject-matter and time ranges excessive, including requests for substance-use records dating to R.J.’s childhood.

The court ruled that the plaintiffs properly asserted the patient-physician and patient-psychotherapist privileges. It rejected Sunbelt’s waiver arguments, explaining that identifying treatment providers, medications, diagnoses, or the existence and purpose of treatment did not disclose the contents of privileged communications. The court also held that seeking non-economic wrongful-death damages did not put R.J.’s entire mental-health history at issue. The court did not decide whether Sunbelt’s proposed expert testimony would ultimately be admissible.

Ruling and Disposition

The court DENIES-IN-PART Sunbelt’s motion to compel production under the three subpoenas and GRANTS-IN-PART the plaintiffs’ reciprocal request for a protective order. It quashes and modifies the subpoenas under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 because they sought privileged materials, irrelevant materials, and discovery that was not proportional to the needs of the case.

The court quashes the Koinonia and Kaiser subpoenas in their entirety. It also denies Sunbelt’s motion, sustains the plaintiffs’ objections, grants the protective-order request, and quashes the subpoenas to the extent they seek non-psychiatric medical treatment or diagnoses, substance abuse, addiction, or drug-use information.

The court modifies the Seneca subpoena. Seneca must conduct a good-faith, reasonable search for nonprivileged documents in its custody or control that expressly discuss R.J.’s diagnosis of “Unspecified Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorder” under Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Code 298.9 (F29), limited to documents dated September 5, 2018, through September 5, 2020. If responsive documents are withheld as privileged, the plaintiffs must provide a privilege log within 30 days of the order, unless the parties reasonably agree to extend that deadline. Any nonprivileged responsive documents must be produced consistent with the confidentiality and protective-order requirements.

The court also ordered procedures for handling any later privilege disputes, including clawback notices and return, destruction, or sequestration of documents claimed to have been produced inadvertently. Because R.J. is a minor, the court ordered the parties to comply with the filing protections for minors and to meet and confer about a stipulated protective order covering confidential discovery, medical and psychiatric information, privileges, and information involving minors. Judge Peter H. Kang signed the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.