Cordero v. United States

Background

Christian Cordero brought a personal-injury action alleging that he was injured when a vehicle driven by Brian Kroptoff struck the vehicle in which Cordero was riding on March 31, 2016. The opinion states that Kroptoff was then an employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Cordero sought $1,750,000 for categories including physical and mental pain and suffering, medical and attendant-care expenses, permanent impairment, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of earning capacity.

The United States moved under the discovery rules to compel Cordero to execute seven additional medical releases. The releases sought records from March 31, 2013—three years before the accident—through the present. They were directed to Flushing Hospital Medical Center, Pinnacle Medical Services, United HealthCare of New York, New York Orthopaedic Hospital Associates, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York City Health and Hospitals, and Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York. The Government argued that the records were needed to compare Cordero’s condition before and after the accident and to determine whether claimed injuries were preexisting or caused by the accident. Cordero argued that the requests were arbitrary and sought information unrelated to his claimed injuries. He also stated that he was not claiming that an increase in epilepsy episodes was connected to the accident and would not seek compensation related to epilepsy.

Legal standard

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) permits discovery of nonprivileged information that is relevant to a claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. Rule 37 permits a party to ask the court to compel discovery. The court explained that district courts have broad discretion to define discovery’s scope and to manage the discovery process.

Court’s analysis

The court concluded that Cordero had placed his medical condition and medical history at issue by seeking damages for injuries allegedly caused by the Government. As a result, the court held that he had waived privacy protection for relevant medical records. The court rejected the argument that records from before the accident were categorically irrelevant, reasoning that the Government was entitled to investigate whether another cause or a preexisting condition contributed to the claimed injuries. It also found that a three-year pre-accident period was reasonable.

After reviewing each release, Cordero’s deposition transcript, and his medical expert’s report, the court found that six releases sought information relevant to the broad damages claims. The court identified relevant potential records at Columbia because Cordero testified that his regular pre-accident treating physician was affiliated with Columbia. It also found that releases directed to New York Presbyterian and New York Orthopaedic could be relevant because Cordero’s counsel represented that those providers treated his foot injury. The court stated that executing those releases would allow the Government to confirm whether it already had all relevant records.

The court treated the Pinnacle release differently. Pinnacle was a home health care agency that examined Cordero as part of his application to serve as a home attendant for his grandmother. The court found that Pinnacle had not provided Cordero medical services before or after the accident, so the release did not seek relevant information.

Disposition

Judge Sarah L. Cave’s order granted in part the Government’s motion and required Cordero to provide executed releases for Flushing Hospital, United, New York Presbyterian, New York Orthopaedic, New York City Health and Hospitals, and Columbia by February 22, 2021. The order denied the motion as to the Pinnacle release and directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion.