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.

Prouty v. Thippanna

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

January 18, 2019

KAREN PROUTY, Plaintiff,
v.
RAMAKRISHNA THIPPANNA, M.D., BOGDON NEDELESCU, M.D. IDANIS BERRIOS MORALES, M.D., JOHNNY S. SALEMEH, JOHN/JANE DOE, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF CAROLYN PARKER, R.N., FAIRLAWN MEDICAL INVESTORS, LLC, d/b/a LIFE CARE CENTER OF AUBURN, AND UMASS MEMORIAL MEDICAL GROUP, INC., Defendants.

          ORDER

          David H. Hennessy United States Magistrate Judge.

         Before the Court are UMass Memorial Medical Group, Inc.'s (“UMMMG”) Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Discovery Requests and Produce Documents (Dkt. no. 65), Plaintiff's Emergency Motion to Compel Non-Party UMass Memorial Medical Center (“UMMMC”) to Comply with Subpoena (Dkt. no. 67), UMMMG's Emergency Motion for Protective Order as to Plaintiff's 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice (Dkt. no. 71), Auburn Medical Investors, LLC d/b/a Life Care Center of Auburn (“LCA”) Emergency Motion for Protective Order (Dkt. no. 77), and Non-Party Worcester Internal Medicine, Inc.'s (“WIM”) Emergency Motion for Protective Order as to the Plaintiff's 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice (Dkt. no. 80). These discovery motions were referred to me by Judge Hillman. Dkt. nos. 69, 73, 79, 85. I heard argument and ruled from the bench on these motions on Wednesday, January 16, 2019. This order is meant to memorialize the rulings I made. I review each motion in turn.

         I. UMass Memorial Medical Group, Inc.'s Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Discovery Requests and Produce Documents (Dkt. no. 65)

         The Court reviewed the parties' written submissions and heard argument on UMMMG's Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Discovery Requests and Produce Documents. Dkt. no. 65. The Court allows UMMMG's motion and orders Plaintiff to respond to UMMMG's requests pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 33 and 34 for the time period of October 2009 to the present, with the exception of protected information. If non-protected or other responsive information is withheld, then in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 34(b)(2)(C), Plaintiff shall identified such withheld matter and the basis for withholding it. Plaintiff is ordered to respond to UMMMG's requests by January 25, 2019.

         II. Plaintiff's Emergency Motion to Compel Non-Party UMass Memorial Medical Center to Comply with Subpoena (Dkt. no. 67)

         The Court reviewed the parties' written submissions and heard argument on Plaintiff's Emergency Motion to Compel Non-Party UMMMC to Comply with Subpoena. See Dkt. no. 67. The Court agrees with UMMMC that Plaintiff failed to provide UMMMC with a reasonable time to comply with the subpoena. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 45((d)(3)(i). The Court reviewed each request individually. The following memorializes the Court's disposition of each demand in Appendix A to the subpoena:

Demands 1 and 2 - UMMMC agrees to provide responsive information shortly.
Demand 3 - The Court denies Plaintiff's motion to compel. Based upon the representations of counsel that materials responsive to Demand 2 will enable Plaintiff to interpret any codes, the information sought by Demand 3 is duplicative.
Demand 4 - The Court denies Plaintiff's motion to compel as to Demand 4 because it is duplicative of information sought in Demand 1.
Demand 5 - The Court allows Plaintiff's motion to compel as to Demand 5 with the limitation that personal addresses are not to be provided. The Court orders production of these responsive materials by January 30, 2019.

         III. UMass Memorial Medical Group, Inc.'s Emergency Motion for Protective Order as to Plaintiff's 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice (Dkt. no. 71)

         The Court reviewed the parties' written submissions and heard argument concerning UMMMG's Emergency Motion for Protective Order as to Plaintiff's 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice. Dkt. no. 71. UMMMG challenges both the noticing of the deposition and the scope of the matters identified in Schedule A to the Notice of Deposition. Id. In particular, UMMMG challenges a series of topics listed in Schedule A of Plaintiff's notice of deposition which propose examining the deponent on Dr. Salameh's thought process both as a medical care provider to Plaintiff and as a hypothetical litigant in this lawsuit.[1] As Dr. Salameh's former employer, the Court orders UMMMG to contact Dr. Salameh and ask him questions to enable the deponent to respond to the matters identified in Schedule A, subject to the modifications noted. See Calzaturficio S.C.A.R.P.A. s.p.a. v. Fabiano Shoe Co., Inc., 201 F.R.D. 33, 36-37 (D. Mass. 2001). If UMMMG is unable to reach Dr. Salameh, or if Dr. Salameh has no memory of his treatment of Plaintiff and no response to the matters identified in Schedule A, UMMMG shall notify both the Court and Plaintiff. The Court reviewed the substance of the matters identified in Schedule A individually. The following memorializes the Court's disposition of each matter identified in Schedule A to the Notice of Deposition:

Paragraphs 1(a) - (c)- The Court denies UMMMG's motion for a protective order and orders UMMMG to respond by providing all responsive personnel files and CVs.
Paragraphs 1(d) & (e)- The Court denies UMMMG's motion for a protective order and directs UMMMG to contact Dr. Salameh and convey at the deposition any responsive information provided by Dr. Salameh.
Paragraph 1(f)- UMMMG does not object to paragraph 1(f).
Paragraph 1(g)- The Court allows UMMMG's motion for a protective order. Any responsive information involves speculation by Dr. Salameh.
Paragraph 1(h)- The Court allows UMMMG's motion for a protective order. Any responsive information involves speculation by Dr. Salameh.
Paragraph 1(i)- UMMMG agrees to inquire of Dr. Salameh and to produce or convey at the deposition responsive records and information.
Paragraphs 1(j) - (o)- The Court denies UMMMG's motion for a protective order and directs UMMMG to contact Dr. Salameh and convey at the deposition any responsive ...

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.