Chute v. Morrison Center
This text of Chute v. Morrison Center (Chute v. Morrison Center) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT CUMBERLAND, ss CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO. CV-16-442 J AMYL. CHUTE, -- · -:-: - ' ·..:...1t~E ··· · ··-~ c,s Clerk'sC·-~ Plaintiff ORDER FEB O3 2c: V. ~ : .. . =r·_ :-·: '. \ . __.., -,1' :i....,... ~ :.., ___ -- •
MORRISON CENTER,
Defendant
Plaintiff objects to defendant's request to produce plaintiff's medical records for the ten 1
years prior to her termination and any post-termination records. Plaintiff is not required to
produce her medical records, as she alleges incidental or "garden variety" emotional distress
only. See (Pl.'s Compl. 6); Morrisette v. Kennebec Cnty., No. 01-01-B-S, 2001 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 13309, at *3-4 (D. Me. Aug. 21, 2001). Plaintiff is precluded at trial from calling any
medical experts on the issue of emotional distress and from offering into evidence records of
treatment for emotional distress or the substance of any communications between plaintiff and
mental health professionals or experts. See Sorenson v. H & R Block. Inc., 197 F.R.D. 199,204
(D. Mass. 2000).
The clerk is directed to incorporate this order into the docket by reference.
Date: February 3, 2017 Nancy Mills Justice, Superior Court
1 Defendant agreed to five years of records during the discovery conference .
I
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Chute v. Morrison Center, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chute-v-morrison-center-mesuperct-2017.