Interrogatories

What is the name of your state? TN

Hello,
In December of 2006 someone ran a stop sign and broadsided us totaled our car and caused us injuries. Yesterday we receive in the mail a letter of Interrogatories and request for production of documents. They want names and addresses of our employers, 10 years of medical records, names of all physicians and medical personnel for the last 10 years, names and addresses of pharmacies for the past 10 years, 10 years of income tax records, names, dates, and settlement amount if we've been in an auto accident before, if we've ever been a litigant in a court action, if a hospital has ever placed a lien against us, if we've been convicted of a felony, and if we've ever filed workers compensation. I can understand wanting medical records for this accident, but aren't they getting kind of personal? I don't feel they have the right to know the majority of the questions and it's violating my privacy. What right do they have to everything else? Do we have to provide all this information?
Thanks,
Sharon

gracie99 said:

They want names and addresses of our employers, 10 years of medical records, names of all physicians and medical personnel for the last 10 years, names and addresses of pharmacies for the past 10 years, 10 years of income tax records, names, dates, and settlement amount if we've been in an auto accident before, if we've ever been a litigant in a court action, if a hospital has ever placed a lien against us, if we've been convicted of a felony, and if we've ever filed workers compensation.

Click to expand...

All very common requests for pre-litigation discovery.

I can understand wanting medical records for this accident, but aren't they getting kind of personal? I don't feel they have the right to know the majority of the questions and it's violating my privacy. What right do they have to everything else? Do we have to provide all this information?

Click to expand...

You have the right to object to any questions that you feel are not relevant to the issue at hand. If they disagree with your objection... they can ask the court to set a hearing on the issue.... and both of you will be able to argue why they think it is relevant, and you think it isn't. The court will then rule.

JETX said:

All very common requests for pre-litigation discovery.


You have the right to object to any questions that you feel are not relevant to the issue at hand. If they disagree with your objection... they can ask the court to set a hearing on the issue.... and both of you will be able to argue why they think it is relevant, and you think it isn't. The court will then rule.

Click to expand...

Thank you.

I'm in Texas, so things may be different here, but I have never heard of sending Interrogatories and RFP unless a case is in litigation.

Who sent these discovery requests to you? Have you sued the other driver? Please clarify your situation.

If you are claiming damages for injuries, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, then your prior medical history and earnings certainly are relevant. Some of these requests sound overly broad, though. If you have a lawyer, s/he will lodge the appropriate objections.

las365 said:

I'm in Texas, so things may be different here, but I have never heard of sending Interrogatories and RFP unless a case is in litigation.

Who sent these discovery requests to you? Have you sued the other driver? Please clarify your situation.

If you are claiming damages for injuries, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, then your prior medical history and earnings certainly are relevant. Some of these requests sound overly broad, though. If you have a lawyer, s/he will lodge the appropriate objections.

Click to expand...

They were sent to our attorney by the insurance companies attorney. Our attorney sent them to us. We will be speaking with him. We are claiming damages for injuries and our vehicle which was totaled. The insurance company has been very uncooperative from the beginning even though the accident was the fault of their client. That's why we are suing them for medical and our vehicle. Why is our prior medical history and earnings relevant? We are not claiming lost wages.

You have to prove that the injuries you are suing for were caused by the accident, so your prior medical history, at least in a limited way, is relevant in case you already had the problem. For example, the defense would be looking for something like: you had a previous knee injury and now are claiming that your knee problem was caused by the accident, but the condition of your knee before and after the accident is the same. It doesn't mean (in my opinion) that the defense should get unfettered access to all of your prior medical history, only the parts that are relevant.

If you aren't claiming lost wages or loss of earning capacity, I don't see why your earnings would be relevant. Send your answers to your lawyer and chat with him or her about the objections. Good luck!

las365 said:

I'm in Texas, so things may be different here, but I have never heard of sending Interrogatories and RFP unless a case is in litigation.

Click to expand...

Ever heard of POST-judgment discovery?? Very common... I do them all the time!

Ever heard of POST-judgment discovery?? Very common... I do them all the time!

Click to expand...

I have absolutely heard of post-judgment discovery. I was responding - gingerly because I have run across you before - to this comment you made about the OP receiving Interrogatories and RFP:

All very common requests for pre-litigation discovery... You have the right to object to any questions that you feel are not relevant to the issue at hand. If they disagree with your objection... they can ask the court to set a hearing on the issue.... and both of you will be able to argue why they think it is relevant, and you think it isn't. The court will then rule.

Click to expand...

If your point is that pre- and post-litigation written discovery are both common, I'm not going to argue with you. I'll just say that in my experience, pre-litigation discovery is not commonly referred to in the formal language of litigation as Interrogatories, etc., and tends to take the form of more informal requests in a letter. The Court doesn't rule on objections or compel responses at that point because there is no Court involvement. Because a lawsuit hasn't been filed. Because it's pre-litigation.

But again, maybe it's different in your state.

las365 said:

If your point is that pre- and post-litigation written discovery are both common, I'm not going to argue with you. I'll just say that in my experience, pre-litigation discovery is not commonly referred to in the formal language of litigation as Interrogatories, etc., and tends to take the form of more informal requests in a letter.

Click to expand...

Then you need a new dictionary.
Pre-litigation does not necessarily mean PRE-filing.... but pre-trial.

The Court doesn't rule on objections or compel responses at that point because there is no Court involvement.

Click to expand...

You are correct. However, I believe the OP erred in not including the fact that a lawsuit has in fact been filed... as I assume.
If as I believe... a lawsuit does exist, my response is correct.
If as you (presumably) believe, no lawsuit, then you would be correct.

So, with that.... the OP needs to clarify. Has a lawsuit been filed??

The OP did say in a subsequent post, "we are suing," which I took to mean that suit has been filed, but yes, sometimes people assume that by hiring an attorney they are suing.

I think we just have a difference in the way we use terminology. The way it is used in my neck of the woods, litigation begins with the filing of the lawsuit and everything after that is part of litigation (or post-litigation). We only refer to activities that take place before the suit is filed as pre-litigation.

las365 said:

You have to prove that the injuries you are suing for were caused by the accident, so your prior medical history, at least in a limited way, is relevant in case you already had the problem. For example, the defense would be looking for something like: you had a previous knee injury and now are claiming that your knee problem was caused by the accident, but the condition of your knee before and after the accident is the same. It doesn't mean (in my opinion) that the defense should get unfettered access to all of your prior medical history, only the parts that are relevant.

If you aren't claiming lost wages or loss of earning capacity, I don't see why your earnings would be relevant. Send your answers to your lawyer and chat with him or her about the objections. Good luck!

Click to expand...

First, I would like to thank everyone for their advice. We had a meeting today with our attorney today. The other party is not entitled to all they asked for, only what pertains to the case.
Thanks again!