Fernando Infanzon v. Allstate Insurance Company

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. 2:19-cv-06483-JAK (SKx) Date March 13, 2020 Title Fernando Infanzon v. Allstate Insurance Company et al.

Present: The Honorable Steve Kim, U.S. Magistrate Judge Connie Chung n/a Deputy Clerk Court Smart / Recorder Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendants: None present None present Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL’S REQUEST FOR TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE AND EXPANDING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Plaintiffs counsel, Suzanne Rand-Lewis (CA SBN #126219), requests to appear telephonically for the March 18, 2020, hearing on the Court’s order to show cause why discovery sanctions should not be imposed. (ECF 51). The request is DENIED. Ms. Rand-Lewis claims that she is unable to appear in person for medical reasons. But the discovery record in this case reveals that she has used suspect medical excuses persistently to shirk discovery obligations and to evade orders of the Court. (ECF 46, 47, 50-1 at 3, 5). So the Court instructed counsel to provide—ex parte and in camera—basic medical documentation to support her representation that she cannot appear in person for medical reasons. What counsel submitted appears heavily redacted with an unknown person’s signature. When asked to provide only the unredacted name and contact information for the physician who signed that document, counsel flatly refused, citing an unfounded privacy concern. The Court has no interest in counsel’s protected health information, which she is free to redact. But the name and contact information for her physician is not protected health information, and it would be submitted in camera in any case. Counsel’s refusal to permit even basic verification of her physician’s existence only solidifies the Court’s reasonable suspicion that the document is fabricated. For this reason, Plaintiffs counsel is also ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE on Wednesday, March 18, 2020, at 10:00 A.M. why the Court should not refer Ms. Rand- Lewis to the California State Bar for misleading the Court. See Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 6068(d), 6103, 6106; Cal. Rule of Prof. Conduct 3.3. Ms. Rand-Lewis must appear in person as ordered. She is also ordered to serve a copy of this order personally on Plaintiff. Failure to comply with this or any other related Court order may subject counsel to contempt of court. See 18 U.S.C. § 401 (2012); Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44-45 (1991); L.R. 83-7. IT IS SO ORDERED.