Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
July 22, 2011, Opinion Filed
Case No. 2D10-5537
[*357] VILLANTI, Judge.
Earl R. Crowley, Home Building Materials, Inc. (HBMI), and Stephen Padar, M.D., seek certiorari review of the trial court's order that required Dr. Padar to bring to his deposition copies of the reports generated for all of the compulsory medical examinations (CMEs) he performed during the three years before his deposition in this case and then to testify to portions of the content of those nonparty CME reports. Because the trial court's order fails to comply with the requirements of section 456.057(7)(a)(3), Florida Statutes (2010), we grant the certiorari petition and quash the trial court's order.
This case began when Arthur Lamming sued Crowley and Crowley's employer, HBMI, contending that he was injured in an automobile accident allegedly caused by Crowley while Crowley was driving a vehicle owned by HBMI. During the course of discovery, Crowley and HBMI requested [**2] that Lamming submit to a CME pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.360. Crowley and HBMI identified Dr. Stephen Padar as the physician who would perform the CME. Lamming attended the CME, and both parties received copies of Dr. Padar's resulting report.
Lamming then served a subpoena for deposition duces tecum on Dr. Padar that required him to bring to his deposition "[a] copy of any and all CME reports prepared by you for the last three (3) calendar years." Crowley and HBMI objected to the subpoena, pointing out that such nonparty CME reports were not discoverable. Lamming then filed a motion to compel Dr. Padar to comply with the subpoena. At the hearing on the motion, Lamming contended that, despite the clear language of his subpoena duces tecum, he did not seek actual production of the nonparty CME reports. Instead, he simply wanted Dr. Padar to bring the nonparty CME reports with him to the deposition so that they would be "available to him to give accurate testimony." However, the trial court declined to require Dr. Padar to bring the nonparty CME reports to the deposition, telling counsel for Lamming that he should "ask those questions, see what happens."
Lamming took [**3] Dr. Padar's deposition shortly thereafter. Following the deposition, Lamming filed a renewed motion to compel in which he argued that Dr. Padar was "evasive" and "nonresponsive" at his deposition. Based on this, Lamming sought an order from the trial court requiring Dr. Padar to attend a second deposition and to bring "all of his [CME] reports from the past five years."
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
66 So. 3d 355 *; 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 11412 **; 36 Fla. L. Weekly D 1567
EARL R. CROWLEY; HOME BUILDING MATERIALS, INC.; and STEPHEN PADAR, M.D., Petitioners, v. ARTHUR LAMMING, Respondent.
Prior History: [**1] Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Pamela A.M. Campbell, Judge.
nonparty, deposition, patient, trial court, notice, disclosure, records, trial court's order, subpoena
Healthcare Law, Medical Treatment, Patient Confidentiality, General Overview