Case Number: 18STCV05947 Hearing Date: November 27, 2019 Dept: 4A

Motion to Quash Subpoena for Records

Having considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On November 20, 2018, Plaintiff Lisa Rollins (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Ebrahim Showkati-Tabrizi and Kevin Mojaradi (“Defendants”) alleging motor vehicle and general negligence for an automobile collision that occurred on November 28, 2016.

On July 25, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion to quash subpoenas pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1987.1.

On October 29, 2019, the Court continued the hearing on Plaintiff’s motion to quash to November 27, 2019.

Trial is set for May 19, 2020.

PARTIES’ REQUEST

Plaintiff asks the Court to quash Defendants’ subpoena for records served on Broadspire Services, Inc., which appears to be in possession of an insurance claim file for Plaintiff’s claim made in connection with a slip and fall she suffered subsequent to the subject vehicle collision.

Plaintiff also asks the Court to impose monetary sanctions against Defendants and their counsel in the amount of $2,860.

LEGAL STANDARD

A deposition subpoena may request (1) only the attendance and testimony of a deponent, (2) only the production of business records for copying, or (3) the attendance and testimony, as well as the production of business records. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.020.) The court, upon motion or the court’s own motion, “may make an order quashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders. In addition, the court may make any other orders as may be appropriate to protect the person from unreasonable or oppressive demands, including unreasonable violations of the right of privacy of the person.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1987.1, subd. (a).) “A deposition subpoena that commands only the production of business records for copying shall designate the business records to be produced either by specifically describing each individual item or by reasonably particularizing each category of item . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2020.410, subd. (a).)

Insurance Code section 791.13 provides, in part, that an insurance institution shall not disclose any personal or privileged information about an individual collected or received in connection with an insurance transaction unless the disclosure is with the written authorization of the individual or in response to a facially valid administrative or judicial order, including a search warrant or subpoena. (Ins. Code, § 791.13, subd. (a), (h); see also Mead Reinsurance Co. v. Superior Court (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 313, 321-322 (discovery of insurance claim files may be conditioned on obtaining the written consent of the persons to whom the files relate).)

The court may in its discretion award the amount of the reasonable expenses incurred in making or opposing the motion, including reasonable attorney’s fees, if the court finds the motion was made or opposed in bad faith or without substantial justification or that one or more of the requirements of the subpoena was oppressive. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1987.2, subd. (a).)

DISCUSSION

On July 8, 2019, Defendants issued a subpoena for production of business records to the custodian of records for Broadspire Services, Inc. (Akhavan Decl., Exh. 1.) Broadspire Services, Inc. appears to be in possession of an insurance claim file for Plaintiff’s claim made in connection with a slip and fall she suffered subsequent to the subject vehicle collision. The subpoena requests the following records be produced:

Any and all documents and records pertaining to the insurance and claim file of Lisa Rollins, including, but not limited to, all payments, policy information, listing of providers, correspondence, all log notes, declaration of coverage, medical records, property damages, repair estimates and repairs, color photographs pertaining to Lisa Rollins, DOB: February 5, 1970, with SS# XXX-XX-9856, from any and all dates. Entire claim file including medical records and medical bills regarding Claim no 188528020001 Date of loss 6/11/17.

This subpoena requests Plaintiff’s entire insurance file with respect to Plaintiff’s slip and fall. Even Defendants concede that the subpoena requests Plaintiff’s entire insurance claim file. (Opp. 2:5-7.) Plaintiff has not consented to disclosing the entire claim file. (Akhavan Decl., Exh. 2.)

Defendants lack authority to obtain the documents requested in the subpoena. (Ins. Code, § 791.13.) There is no good cause to disclose any personal or privileged information about an individual collected or received in connection with an insurance transaction contained in the insurance claim file, other than Plaintiff’s relevant medical records.

Accordingly, the Court grants the motion to quash the subpoena. The Court finds that Defendants had no substantial justification for requesting such a broad subpoena. Defendants do not sufficiently defend the breadth of the subpoena. Thus, in the Court’s discretion, it will award a reasonable sanction against Defendants and their counsel.

Plaintiff’s request for $2,860 in sanctions consists of .5 hours reviewing the subpoena, 1.5 hours meeting and conferring, 3 hours drafting the moving papers, .5 hours reviewing the opposition, 1 hour drafting the reply papers, and 1.5 hours in appearing at the hearing at a rate of $350 an hour, plus one $60 filing fee. (Akhavan Decl., ¶¶ 12-13.) The Court finds this to be unreasonable. The motion is straight-forward. The Court finds $960 ($300/hr. x 3 hrs. plus one $60 filing fee) to be a reasonable amount of sanctions.

The motion is GRANTED.

The subpoena Defendants issued on July 8, 2019 to Broadspire Services, Inc. is QUASHED. The Court notes that the parties appear to agree that Defendants would be entitled to a subpoena that requests medical records for injuries suffered in the slip and fall so long as they relate to the same body parts that were previously injured in the vehicle collision at issue in this case. Accordingly, the Court rules that Defendants may issue a new subpoena to Broadspire Services, Inc., seeking Plaintiff’s medical records for injuries to the same body parts that she contends were injured in the vehicle collision at issue in this case.

Defendants and their counsel of record are ordered to pay Plaintiff $960, jointly and severally, within 30 days of this ruling.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.