Q: Not citing/referencing any version of complaints would be more reasonable?
A version of complaint may be appropriate to cite in motion for protective order from authorization to release medical info. Defendant demurred First and Second Amended complaint. Court ordered to amend First Amended Complaint, not ordering out basis for legal action.
In this case - due to continuous demurrers of 'unintelligible ' complaints, - not citing/referencing any version of complaints would be more reasonable? Plaintiff can site responses to interrogatories, and fundamental facts of the case.
A:
Under California law, whether to cite or reference a specific version of a complaint in a motion for a protective order regarding the release of medical information depends on the circumstances of the case. Here are a few considerations:
1. Relevance: If the specific allegations or facts in a particular version of the complaint are directly relevant to the argument for the protective order, it may be appropriate to cite that version. However, if the basis for the protective order is unrelated to the specific allegations in the complaint, it may not be necessary to reference it.
2. Procedural posture: Given that the defendant has demurred to the First and Second Amended Complaints, and the court has ordered the plaintiff to amend the First Amended Complaint without ordering out the basis for the legal action, it seems that the operative complaint is still in flux. In this situation, focusing on the fundamental facts of the case and the responses to interrogatories may be more effective than relying on a particular version of the complaint.
3. Clarity and concision: If previous versions of the complaint have been deemed "unintelligible," citing them may not strengthen the argument for the protective order. Instead, presenting a clear, concise argument based on the relevant facts and law may be more persuasive.
Ultimately, the decision to cite or reference a specific version of the complaint should be based on whether doing so enhances the argument for the protective order. If the plaintiff can effectively argue for the protective order based on the responses to interrogatories and the fundamental facts of the case, without relying on a particular version of the complaint, that approach may be more reasonable given the case's procedural history.
However, it is always best to consult with an attorney familiar with the specific details of the case and local court practices to determine the most appropriate strategy for the motion.
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
