In Re: Medical Review Proceedings of Shandoylnn Hebert
In Re: Medical Review Proceedings of Shandoylnn Hebert, No. 2021CW0268 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. May 10, 2021).
The holding in the court’s own words
We conclude the plaintiff failed to carry her burden of showing special circumstances pre -deposition necessitating disclosure of the surveillance video.
Quoted verbatim from the opinion — no paraphrase, nothing generated. Not yet human-reviewed. How we find the holding.
Opinion text
STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
IN RE: MEDICAL REVIEW PANEL NO. 2021 CW 0268
PROCEEDINGS FOR SHANDOLYNN
HEBERT
MAY 10, 2021
In Re: Mark J. Dominguez, M. D., applying for supervisory
writs, 22nd Judicial District Court, Parish of St.
Tammany, No. 2018- 10450.
BEFORE: McDONALD, HOLDRIDGE, AND PENZATO, JJ.
WRIT GRANTED. The district court' s February 5, 2021
judgment that denied defendant' s Motion to Quash Notice of
Records Deposition for Production Records Subpoena
of Only and
Duces Tecum is reversed.
The credibility of the plaintiff in a
personal
injury case is key. Surveillance video can be a
critical means of testing the plaintiff' s credibility with
respect to the physical injuries and limitations claimed. The
search for truth is best served by a general rule favoring post-
deposition production of surveillance video unless special
circumstances necessitate pre -deposition disclosure. See Wolford
v. JoEllen Smith Psychiatric 96- 2460 ( La. 5/ 20/ 97), 693
Hosp.,
So. 2d 1164. We conclude the plaintiff failed to carry her burden
of showing special circumstances pre -deposition
necessitating
disclosure of the surveillance video. Therefore, defendant' s
Motion to Quash Notice of Records Deposition for Production of
Records Only and Subpoena Duces Tecum is granted, and defendant
is not required to disclose the surveillance video to plaintiff
until her deposition is completed.
JMM
GH
AHP
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT
7p4om,/
DEPUTYWCLRK
gi
OF COURT
FOR THE COURT