No. 00-79197 (2002). Wagner Moving and Storage, Inc. v. MacDonald.

Case DateSeptember 25, 2002
CourtKentucky
Kentucky Workers Compensation 2002. No. 00-79197 (2002). Wagner Moving and Storage, Inc. v. MacDonald WAGNER MOVING and STORAGE, INC. and VANLINER INSURANCE COMPANY PETITIONER vs. ROBERT MACDONALD and HON. RICHARD M. JOINER, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE RESPONDENTS OPINION AND ORDEROPINION ENTERED: September 25, 2002CLAIM NO. 00-79197APPEAL FROM HON. RICHARD M. JOINER, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DISMISSING * * * * * * BEFORE: LOVAN, Chairman, STANLEY and GARDNER, Members.GARDNER, Member. Petitioners, Wagner Moving and Storage, Inc. and Vanliner Insurance Company ("Wagner"), appeal from an order of Hon. Richard M. Joiner, Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ"), compelling Wagner to produce certain reports and photographs as requested by the respondent, Robert MacDonald ("MacDonald"), as part of his discovery. Wagner also seeks a Writ of Prohibition against the ALJ, as the real party in interest, enjoining him from enforcing the discovery order. MacDonald filed an Application for Resolution of Injury Claim, and simultaneously, a request for production of documents. Included were the following requests: Defendant is requested to produce at plaintiff's counsel's office during normal business hours any and all photographs or video tape the defendant has or has access to which show(s) or purports to show plaintiff, or any other person, scene or object which is relevant to this claim. . . . . You are hereby requested to produce the complete report and records prepared by any case management nurse, rehabilitation nurse, certified rehabilitation coordinator, or other personnel who have done any investigation or interviews in connection with the plaintiff's injury(s) other than the defendant's claims representative(s), and attorney(s). Counsel for Wagner objected to these requests, alleging the information sought is privileged as "work product." MacDonald's motion to compel and supporting memorandum, as well as Wagner's response, was considered by the ALJ. The ALJ determined the request for photographs and videotapes and ordered that should Wagner or its counsel become "aware of the existence of any photographs or videotapes that fall within the scope of the plaintiff's request, the defendant is obliged to seasonably supplement its response to the plaintiff's request, raising any objection that then be appropriate." Addressing the case...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT