Your current state is Ohio
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... View More 
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Apr 1, 2024
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... View More
Should Motion for protective order from authorization of medical information be verified pursuant to California Civil Code Section 56.11(c) ?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Apr 1, 2024
Yes, under California Civil Code Section 56.11(c), a motion for a protective order from the authorization of medical information should be verified.
The relevant part of the code states:
"Any motion seeking a protective order to limit the scope of an authorization under... View More
Upon the following circumstances: which version of Complaint is considered an operational (current) version of Complaint?
1. First Amended Complaint was demurred by Defendant. The court ordered Plaintiff to amend; and the Second Amended Complaint was filed and served.
2. The Second... View More
answered on Apr 1, 2024
It depends for what purpose.
The Third is certainly not operational as the Court has not granted the motion to amend.
The second amended is operational for the current allegations, except that is subject to the current demurrer/strike.
The First amended complaint may be... View More
Upon the following circumstances: which version of Complaint is considered an operational (current) version of Complaint?
1. First Amended Complaint was demurred by Defendant. The court ordered Plaintiff to amend; and the Second Amended Complaint was filed and served.
2. The Second... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Apr 1, 2024
Based on the circumstances you've described, the current operational version of the complaint under California law would be the Second Amended Complaint. Here's the reasoning:
1. When the First Amended Complaint was demurred by the Defendant, and the court ordered the Plaintiff to... View More
What HIPAA statute includes privacy rights statement, that belongs to objection to release of medical information, when legal process involved?,
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 31, 2024
The most relevant section of HIPAA that addresses an individual's right to object to the release of their protected health information (PHI) in the context of a legal process is 45 CFR § 164.512(e) - Standard: Disclosures for judicial and administrative proceedings.
This section... View More
Does objection to release of medical records require hearing? (This is NOT motion for protective order by court, requiring hearing)
Objection can be opposed by motion to compel that does require hearing.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 31, 2024
Under California law, an objection to the release of medical records does not automatically require a hearing. The process typically works as follows:
1. When a party requests medical records through a subpoena or other discovery request, the other party (or the medical provider) can object... View More
Defendant requested release of medical records. There was no subpoena.
1. Such request is equivalent to request for production?
2. When responding party objects release of requested records entirely, and presents facts why records requested are irrelevant to claimed damages, which... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 31, 2024
Under California law, a request for the release of medical records without a subpoena would generally be treated as a request for production of documents, which is governed by the California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP).
1. Request for production: The request for release of medical records... View More
A party files objection to request to authorize release of medical records, any items and types, entirely.
Should objection to release of medical records be verified? Objection is accompanied with facts, why request for medical records is irrelevant.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 31, 2024
Under California law, an objection to a request for authorization to release medical records does not need to be verified. However, the objection should be accompanied by a clear explanation of why the requested medical records are irrelevant to the case at hand.
According to California... View More
What statute defines format for verification of objection to release of medical information, with facts?
Request for release of any items, any type of medical information is objected, with factual basis of irrelevancy of protected information to claimed damages.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 31, 2024
Under California law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA), which is codified in California Civil Code Section 56 et seq., governs the release of medical information. Specifically, Section 56.11 addresses the verification of an objection to the release of medical information.... View More
What CCP/rules guide procedure of Objection to request for authorization of medical records.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 31, 2024
In California, the procedure for objecting to a request for authorization of medical records is guided by the California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) and the California Rules of Court. The relevant sections are:
1. CCP § 1985.8 - Subpoena for production of personal records:
- This... View More
When objection to release of medical records is made on the basis of irrelevancy of documents sought, to the damages claimed in the lawsuit, what statute defines objection?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 31, 2024
In California, the primary statute that governs the procedure for objecting to the release of medical records on the grounds of irrelevance is Evidence Code section 994, which establishes the physician-patient privilege.
Under Evidence Code section 994, a patient has a privilege to refuse... View More
If objection to production request includes only objections, shall it be verified?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 31, 2024
Under California law, if a response to a request for production of documents contains only objections and no factual assertions, the response does not need to be verified.
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 2031.250 states:
"(a) The party to whom a demand for... View More
If objection to production request includes only objections, shall it be verified?
answered on Mar 31, 2024
If only objections then no verification is necessary.
Caution, discovery must be answered to the extent not objectionable. Therefore, a judge will look negatively on a response with only objections unless there is a major problem with the discovery.
in response to Deposition Subpoena - Motion to Quash.
in response to request to authorization release of medical records - Motion for protective order.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 30, 2024
Under California law, the correct responses to a deposition subpoena or a request for authorization to release medical records are as follows:
1. Deposition Subpoena: If you receive a deposition subpoena and wish to object to it, you should file a Motion to Quash. A Motion to Quash is a... View More
Response pursuant to CCP § 2031.060 (Motion for protective order
in response to request for authorization of medical records).
Which exactly statute defines criteria for Motion for Protective Order: irrelevant, protected information, not calculated to lead to admissible evidence,... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 30, 2024
The California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) Section 2031.060 governs motions for protective orders in response to requests for production of documents, including medical records. This statute allows a party to seek a protective order from the court to limit the scope of discovery or assert... View More
Response pursuant to CCP § 2031.060 (Motion for protective order
in response to request for authorization of medical records).
Which exactly statute defines criteria for Motion for Protective Order: irrelevant, protected information, not calculated to lead to admissible evidence,... View More
answered on Mar 30, 2024
You don't need a protective order. From the information in your post, all the defendant did was ask for an authorization. Just say no if the subpoena requests records unrelated to the injuries at issue.
If the defendant issues a subpoena for records unrelated to your injuries, then... View More
Is Plaintiff's Motion to Quash applicable as response to Defendant's request for authorization of medical information?
(Unless Motion for protective order is applicable).
Should statutes CCP Section 2025.420 (b) 1), 7), 9), 10), 11); CCP Section 2025.420 (f) 1), 2), 3),... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 30, 2024
Based on California law, a Motion to Quash is typically used to challenge a subpoena, not to respond to a request for authorization of medical information. In this case, a Motion for Protective Order would be more appropriate.
Under California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) § 2031.060, a... View More
The question is about fit-to-appropriate process:
Motion to Quash vs Motion for Protective Order, in situation when Defendant requested authorization for medical records (Not deposition subpoena).
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 30, 2024
In California, when a defendant requests authorization to obtain medical records, the appropriate response is typically to file a Motion for a Protective Order rather than a Motion to Quash. Here's why:
1. Motion to Quash: A Motion to Quash is generally used to challenge a subpoena,... View More
Opposition versus motion for protective order. Which response is more effcient?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 30, 2024
In California, when faced with a request to authorize the release of medical records, both an opposition and a motion for a protective order can be effective responses, depending on the specific circumstances of the case. Here's a comparison of the two approaches:
Opposition:... View More
California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) sections 2030.260 (for interrogatories), vs 2031.260 (for inspection demands).
Thus - when Plaintiff files motion for protective order from request to authorize release of medical records, only section 2031.260 (for inspection demands) is in relevance?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Mar 30, 2024
You raise an important question about which California Code of Civil Procedure section applies when seeking a protective order related to a request to release medical records.
The key distinction is that:
- CCP 2030.260 pertains to protective orders related to interrogatories... View More
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.
