12 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 577a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Interrogatories — Medical provider is ordered to provide better answers to interrogatories and identify any persons or entities possessing ownership interest in provider and all persons employed at facility where insured received treatment during one month — Motion to compel better response to request to produce lists of literature received by medical provider, documentation regarding persons who provided services to insured, medical director contract, and other documents is granted in part with limitations as to time period and facility at issue and provisions for making some documents available for inspection if documentation is too voluminous
ROSE RADIOLOGY CENTERS, INC., a/a/o ANGELO CIANCIATTO, Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County, Civil Division. Case No. 04-13647, Division H. March 8, 2005. Michelle Sisco, Judge. Counsel: Kimberly A. Sandefer, Gale L. Young, P.A., Tampa. Arthur Liebling.
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL BETTER AND/OR SUFFICIENT ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIESAND MOTION TO COMPEL BETTER AND/OR SUFFICIENT RESPONSE TO REQUEST TO PRODUCE
THIS CAUSE, having come on before this Court on February 7, 2005, upon the Defendant’s Motion to Compel Better And/Or Sufficient Answers to Interrogatories and Motion to Compel Better And/Or Sufficient Response to Request to Produce, and the Court having heard argument of counsel for the respective parties, and being otherwise duly advised in the premises, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Defendant’s Motion To Compel Better And/Or Sufficient Answers to Interrogatories is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to provide verified better and/or sufficient answers to Interrogatories numbered 8,13, 22 and 23. With respect to Interrogatory Number 22, Plaintiff shall identify any persons and/or entities that possess any ownership interest in Plaintiff. With respect to Interrogatory Number 23, this Interrogatory is limited to the extent that Plaintiff shall identify all those employed at the facility where Angelo Cianciatto received treatment/services during December, 2003.
2. Defendant’s Motion To Compel Better And/Or Sufficient Response to Request to Produce is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff is ordered to provide better and/or sufficient responses, including any work product privilege logs in response to Request to Produce numbers 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 16, 18, 19, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 34. With respect to Request to Produce Number 4, the request is limited to any such documentation concerning this matter. With respect to Request to Produce number 7, if Plaintiff determines that such documentation is too voluminous, Plaintiff shall make such documentation available for inspection by Defendant at a convenient date and time. With respect to Request to Produce Number 8, Plaintiff shall list any and all publications, newsletters, etc. that Plaintiff received during the six (6) month period prior to and six (6) months subsequent to the date at issue in this matter. With respect to Request to Produce Number 9, the request is limited to those who provided services to Angelo Cianciatto on the date of service at issue in this matter, based on Plaintiff’s counsel’s advisement that Dr. Rose and Mr. Ring are the only ones at Plaintiff’s facility who provided any services to Mr. Cianciatto. With respect to Request to Produce Number 18, the request is limited to any such documentation between Plaintiff, Dr. Richard Robinson and/or Bloomingdale Chiropractic Clinic. With respect to Request to Produce Numbers 29, 30 and 31, Plaintiff shall produce documentation as to Plaintiff, as a whole, and Plaintiff’s Brandon facility, where the treatment/services at issue were rendered. With respect to Request to Produce Number 34, Plaintiff shall produce the contract for the medical director and/or clinic director for Plaintiff’s Brandon facility which was in effect on the date of service at issue in this matter.
3. Defendant’s Motion To Compel Better And/Or Sufficient Response to Request to Produce is DENIED IN PART as to Request to Produce numbers 3, 6 and 13, however, Defendant reserves the right to readdress Request to Produce numbers 3, 6 and 13 at a future time if necessary. With respect to Request to Produce Number 3, Plaintiff produced at the hearing documentation in response thereto and as a result, Defendant has the right to readdress this matter with the Court after Defendant has had an opportunity to review said documents.
4. Plaintiff shall produce the foregoing to Defendant within thirty (30) days from the date of this Order.
5. Defendant’s request for attorney’s fees and costs is DENIED.
* * *
