8 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 571c
Civil procedure — Discovery — Insurance — Relationship to company that sold or supplied computer program utilized to review, reduce or deny medical bills; materials used by training personnel to explain to its adjusters the use of the software; names and job titles of defendant’s training personnel in certain area and within certain time period who were knowledgeable on use of computer program — Motion to compel insurer to answer interrogatories granted
MARGARET HUTH, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County. Case No. 2000-7141-SC, Division I. June 27, 2001. Charlotte W. Anderson, Judge. Counsel: William C. Rocker, Timothy A. Patrick, P.A., Tampa, for Plaintiff. Charles Spinner, Barnett and Associates, P.A., for Defendant.ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’SCONTINUED MOTION TO COMPEL
THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel, on May 4, 2001, both parties appearing through counsel and the Court having heard argument of counsels, it is hereby:
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that:
1. The motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s Interrogatory number eleven (11), Defendant shall describe its relationship to the company that sold or supplied the computer program utilized to review, reduce or deny medical bills in this case and give a description and exact location of any contracts, writings, memos, reports, records, notes or any other documentation pertaining to said relationship;
2. The motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s Interrogatory number twelve (12), Defendant shall list the names and job titles of Defendant’s training personnel in Hillsborough County, Florida, working for Defendant for the period running from one year before the accident and one year after the accident who are knowledgeable on the use of the above computer program and how it is used by your personnel;
3. The motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s Interrogatory number thirteen (13), Defendant shall list all internal seminars, audio tapes and video tapes used by its training personnel to explain to its adjusters the use of the computer software described above for the review of claims;
4. The motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff’s Interrogatory number fourteen (14);
5. Plaintiff withdraws Interrogatories numbered fifteen (15) and eighteen (18);
6. The motion is DENIED in part as to Interrogatory number sixteen (16), Defendant shall answer whether or not the above described computer program involves a database; the Court determines that any discovery regarding a description of any database and how it may provide any reliable information for reviewing of Florida PIP claims should be sought through deposition;
7. The motion is GRANTED in part as to Interrogatory number seventeen (17), Defendant shall modify its answer to this Interrogatory as set forth here today to indicate if there are in fact any forms that are associated with the use of the computer program other than the Explanation of Reviews previously provided; and in doing so, shall list for each the name of each form, the number of pages of each form and the date of each form.
8. Defendant shall have twenty days from the entry of this Order to comply with its provisions.
* * *
