Antipova v. CareMount Medical P.C.

Background

This is a medical-malpractice action brought by Yelena Antipova, a licensed attorney representing herself. She alleges that defendants, including her internist, gynecologist, and a genetic counselor with whom she could not obtain an appointment, negligently failed to inform her about genetic risks, refer her for genetic counseling, provide counseling, or perform genetic testing before her 2019 ovarian-cancer diagnosis. She later tested positive for the BRCA1 gene.

On October 3, 2022, the court ordered Antipova to sign releases for employment records limited to compensation and disability accommodations or benefits, produce complete federal tax returns for 2020 and 2021 with all schedules, and attend an oral deposition during the week of January 9, 2023. The court had previously postponed the deposition because Antipova was undergoing an expected six-month course of chemotherapy. Judge John P. Cronan later overruled Antipova’s objections to the October 3 order.

Discovery Disputes

Antipova declined to sign the employment-record releases provided by defendants’ counsel, produced heavily redacted tax returns showing only Schedule C, and said she was unavailable for the scheduled deposition because of additional chemotherapy treatments. She argued that her medical records made a deposition unnecessary, that chemotherapy made the deposition burdensome, and that the employer releases were improper. She also argued that defendants’ responses to certain requests for admission were improper and asked the court to require amended responses.

A request for admission is a discovery request asking another party to admit or deny a fact or the application of law to fact. The court held a discovery conference on December 1, 2022, and issued this order summarizing its rulings.

Rulings

1. Deposition: The court required Antipova to sit for an oral deposition. It found that her medical records did not answer every relevant question and that chemotherapy justified postponing the deposition but did not excuse her from it. The deposition was rescheduled for the week of January 30, 2023. At Antipova’s option, it could occur remotely and be divided into up to three sessions totaling no more than seven hours. The parties were directed to agree on the dates and times. If another January chemotherapy treatment became necessary, the deposition could be rescheduled again, and the court would also modify expert-discovery and summary-judgment deadlines.

2. Tax returns: The court required Antipova to produce her complete federal tax returns for 2020 and 2021, including all schedules, by December 2, 2022. The returns could be designated “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” and treated accordingly by defendants’ counsel. The court warned that disobeying a discovery ruling could lead to sanctions, including contempt sanctions. It concluded that Antipova had not timely raised the tax-return issue in her earlier objections and had provided no new information warranting a change to the prior order.

3. Employer authorizations: The court agreed that defendants’ release forms were not properly limited. It ordered defendants to provide updated authorization forms limited to records concerning compensation and disability accommodations or benefits, if any, by December 5, 2022. Antipova was ordered to sign and return them by December 12, 2022.

4. Requests for admission: The court held that defendants’ existing responses were not improper. It nevertheless construed or limited several of Antipova’s requests and required updated responses by December 15, 2022. The revised responses concerned requests involving Cornell University, Dr. Margaret Polaneczky, Dr. Ann Carlson, Dr. Edward S. Barnes, and CareMount Medical. For some requests, the court replaced “counseled” with “discussed,” limited the materials or records to be addressed, removed specified language, or conditioned a revised response on Antipova’s production of an original or accurate copy of a letter.

5. Further proceedings: The court scheduled a video status conference for January 24, 2023, and required a joint status letter by January 17, 2023. It denied all relief not expressly granted and left the earlier case-management orders in effect except where this order modified them.

Nature of the Order

This was a discovery and case-management order. The court did not decide the underlying medical-malpractice claims or determine whether any defendant was legally responsible for Antipova’s cancer or treatment.