 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Lund v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company12/6/2001
ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY MOTIONS
Summary:
Parties filed cross-motions to compel discovery. In addition, respondent sought a protective order while claimant sought attorney fees. The discovery sought by claimant is employer files, withheld documents from the claims file, and further answer of a contention interrogatory. Respondent is seeking medical records which claimant had previously agreed to produce.
Held:
St. Paul shall seek the employer files to the extent that they have not been produced in another action brought by claimant against the employer; if the employer fails to cooperate it will be formally joined as a party and the Court's discovery rules will be enforced against it. As to claims file documents, the parties are ordered to comply with Court Rule 24.5.324(4) -(6). The request for further answer of the contention interrogatory is denied.
Topics:
Discovery: Generally. Discovery is not a game. The Court expects counsel to engage in discovery in a spirit of cooperation and collegiality. Hard ball tactics are condemned.
Discovery: Requests for Production. Employer has an obligation to cooperate with an insurer and the insurer cannot slough a discovery request for information and documents of the employer by merely alleging it is not a real party in interest. The insurer must demand the information from the employer and furnish it if possible. If the employer is uncooperative, then it will be joined as a party and the Court's discovery rules enforced directly against it.
Discovery: Compelling Discovery. Employer has an obligation to cooperate with an insurer and the insurer cannot slough a discovery request for information and documents of the employer by merely alleging it is not a real party in interest. The insurer must demand the information from the employer and furnish it if possible. If the employer is uncooperative, then it will be joined as a party and the Court's discovery rules enforced directly against it.
Discovery: Requests for Production. The Court will not order discovery for discovery's sake. Where the claimant has already obtained documents from the employer in another action against the employer, the Court will not order that the documents be produced a second time.
Discovery: Compelling Discovery. The Court will not order discovery for discovery's sake. Where the claimant has already obtained documents from the employer in another action against the employer, the Court will not order that the documents be produced a second time.
Discovery: Privileges: Attorney Work Product. The Court has a specific rule regarding production of claims file documents which the insurer alleges are protected by attorney-client or attorney work product privilege. Rule 24.5.324(4)-(6). The parties must follow that rule.
Constitutions, Statutes, Regulations and Rules: Workers' Compensation Court Rules: ARM 24.5.324(4)-(6). The Court has a specific rule regarding production of claims file documents which the insurer alleges are protected by attorney-client or attorney work product privilege. Rule 24.5.324(4)-(6). The parties must follow that rule.
Discovery: Requests for Production: Medical Records. The Court will not compel a claimant to produce medical records she has made a good faith effort to obtain but has been unable to obtain because the medical provider fails to cooperate. The records sought should be subpoened.
Discovery: Requests for Production: Compelling Discovery. The Court will not compel a claimant to produce medical records she has made a good faith effort to obtain but has been unable to obtain be
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Montana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|