26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 656b
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2608HOLMInsurance — Discovery — Deposition duces tecum — Corporate representative — Relevant inquiries
EPIC AUTO GLASS, LLC, As Assignee of Selvin Holmes, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 6th Judicial Circuit in and for Pinellas County, Civil Division. Case No. 14-010167-SC. September 12, 2018. Edwin B. Jagger, Judge. Counsel: Marc B. Nussbaum, Reeder & Nussbaum, P.A., St. Petersburg, for Plaintiff. Kristin Gonzalez, Banker Lopez Gassler, P.A., St. Petersburg, for Defendant.
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR PROTECTIVEORDER DIRECTED AT PLAINTFF’S THIRD AMENDEDNOTICE OF DEPOSITION DUCES TECUMOF DEFENDANT’S CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on July 17, 2018 on Defendant’s Motion For Protective Order directed at Plaintiff’s Third Amended Notice Of Deposition Duces Tecum (hereinafter “NOD”), with the court having heard the argument of counsel and being otherwise fully advised, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Plaintiff scheduled the deposition of Defendant’s Corporate Representative. As part of the deposition notice, Plaintiff set forth eight areas of inquiry for the deposition, as follows:
1. Any and all matters relating to Defendant’s Bid Process in this case and how the bids in this case were obtained and by whom.
2. Any and all matters relating to Defendant’s investigation of this claim.
3. Any and all matters relating to Defendant’s program pricing and program pricing payment.
4. Any and all matters relating to Defendant’s affirmative defenses.
5. Any and all matters relating to Defendant’s investigation of this claim.
6. Any and all matters relating to the data used by Defendant to arrive at the amount to pay in this case.
7. Any and all matters relating to Defendant’s payment of this claim.
8. All matters relating to how a bidding company is identified and contacted and selected for the bid process.”
2. Defendant objected to areas of inquiry 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. Defendant objected to areas of inquiry 2 and 5 based on work product privilege and areas of inquiry 3 and 6 based on trade secret privilege.
3. Defendant has since withdrawn their objection to areas of inquiry 1, 4 and 7. Area of inquiry number 8 is resolved by agreement of the parties to limit the deposition testimony to this case only. The court finds the areas of inquiry to be relevant and discoverable and over-rules Defendant’s objections to numbers 2 and 5. With regard to areas of inquiry 3 and 6, the court directs Defendant to produce to the court for in camera inspection the documents their corporate representative will need to review at the deposition in order to provide substantive testimony for the areas of inquiry.
4. As it relates to the Duces Tecum portion of Plaintiff’s NOD, Plaintiff made the following requests:
1. The data relied upon in arriving at the amount to pay in this case.
2. The data relating to Defendant’s program pricing for this claim.
3. The specific bid data obtained for this claim.
4. All documents, emails, letters, phone messages and other computer communications between Defendant and any third parties and between any third parties themselves (such as the third party company that obtained the bid and the bidding company) as it relates to this claim. This includes but is not limited to communications with any company that obtained bids as well as communications with the companies that provided the actual bids.
5. Any contracts or agreements between Defendant and the bidding companies.
6. Any contracts or agreements relating to Defendant and any third parties which relate to Defendant’s program pricing.
7. All documents or things relating to the manner in which any third parties are directed to obtain bids in this case and how these bidding companies were identified and contacted.
8. All documents or things relating to how a bidding company is identified and contacted and selected for the bid process.
9. All insurance policies that would inure to the benefit of Plaintiff or to the Plaintiff’s assignor, together with any declaration of coverage page and sworn statement of a corporate officer of Defendant attesting to the coverage and authenticity of the policy as required by Florida Statutes.
10. The entire claim file maintained by you or anyone on your behalf with regard to the assignor, cover to cover, including original jackets and everything contained within the file, include without limitation:
(a) All notations regarding notice of the accident;
(b) All telephone messages to or from you, or any of your agents on your behalf;
(c) All accident reports prepared by you, any law enforcement agencies or the Plaintiff or your insured;
(d) All interoffice memoranda and correspondence between you and any of your representatives and Plaintiff or any of Plaintiff’s representatives;
(e) All documents reflecting any payment made to any person or entity for any reason as a result of the assignee’s claim.
(f) Any and all tapes and/or transcripts of statements taken of any person, including but not limited to Examinations Under Oath, regarding the insured’s claim.
(g) All records of the time expended on file or costs expended on file in the handling of any aspect of the Plaintiff’s claim.
(h) All computer generated notes or other written or computer generated notes regarding the handling of this claim.
11. Any and all estimates of repair or statements concerning the nature and extent of damage to the vehicle involved.
12. Any and all writings, memorandums, notes or other materials reflecting examination by the Defendant of the vehicle involved.
13. Any and all documents, data, evidence, and things, whether computer generated or not, which Defendant intends to rely on to establish the Defendant reimbursed Plaintiff pursuant to the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.
14. All documents supporting any affirmative defense of Defendant.
15. All reports and current cv(s) from any expert retained for any reason regarding the insured’s claim.
16. All correspondence regarding the insured’s claim, including but not limited to, correspondence with experts independent adjusters, appraisers, inspectors and any other third party.
17. All requests for proof of loss and copies of all proofs of loss received by Defendant from Plaintiff (or the insured) or any representative of Plaintiff (or the insured).
18. All estimates received by Defendant from any source for repairs to the insured’s vehicle.
19. Any and all documents, data, surveys and things Defendant intends to rely on to establish the Defendant reimbursed Plaintiff pursuant to the terms and conditions of the insurance policy.
20. Copies of all data and information relied upon in arriving at the payment amount in this case.
21. All documents, letters, faxes, emails and other things relating in any way to defendant’s investigation of this claim.
22. Any and all documents and things providing the name and address of all adjusters/supervisors in charge of payments, decision making and control of the claim file of the Plaintiff, and the names and addresses and the position of each person who has ever worked on the file of the claim of the Plaintiff, in this matter.
23. All documents relating to any information, scripts, training or educational materials as it relates to how the bids are obtained or to be obtained as it relates to payment of comprehensive glass benefits.
24. With regard to any third parties, who provided any servicing, analyses, adjusting or otherwise rendered services to you in this claim please identify:
(a) The name of the individual who hired or contacted the third party on behalf of your company;
(b) The date and nature of the services provided by any third party;
(c) The name of the third party person that obtained the bids in this case;
(d) The address of the third party person that obtained the bids in this case.
5. Defendant has no objection to numbers 3, 4, 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18. Defendant has withdrawn their objection to Duces Tecum request number 7. Plaintiff has withdrawn Duces Tecum request 22.
6. Duces Tecum number 7 is resolved by agreement of the parties to limit the request to this case. Duces Tecum number 10 is resolved by agreement of the parties in that Defendant need only produce the non-privileged relevant portions of the claims file. Duces Tecum number 23 is resolved by agreement of the parties in that Defendant agreeing to produce any script, literature, information, or directives provided to third parties as it relates to any bids obtained or the bid process in this case. Duces Tecum number 24 by agreement of the parties in that the request is limited to this case.
7. As it relates to Duces Tecum numbers 1, 2, 5, 6, 13, 19 and 20 the court finds the requests relevant and directs Defendant to produce the requested documents and things to the court for in-camera inspection and determination of any trade secret privilege.
8. The court over-rules Defendant’s Objection to Duces Tecum request number 21 and the items are to be produced.
9. Any documents ordered to be produced to the court for in camera inspection shall be provided to the court within thirty (30) days of this Order. The court will review the documents and information provided and will determine the appropriate manner or method of such production, if required.
