Hon. Ronald B. Leighton
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
ANAJEAN PENNY, | Case No. 3:18-cv-05195-RBL Plaintiff, PRETRIAL ORDER VS. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. JURISDICTION Plaintiff filed this claim originally in state court, Superior Court of Washington for the County of Clark. Defendant removed the case to the Federal Court based upon diversity of citizenship under 28 USC Sec. 1332 and 1446.
CLAIMS AND DEFENSES Plaintiff intends to pursue the claims she alleged in her Complaint, namely: e That on August 27, 2014, Plaintiff was involved in an automobile collision in Vancouver, Washington that was caused by the negligence of Nelda Lindell; that as a direct and
DECLARATION OF SERVICE
proximate result of the collision and Ms, Lindell’s negligence that Plaintiff sustained extensive personal injuries and incurred substantial medical expense, and other economic and non- economic damages in an amount to be determined at trial; ° That Ms. Lindell was underinsured, and that Plaintiff’s underinsured motorist coverage with Defendant State Farm required State Farm to pay the difference between Ms. Lindell’s policy limits and what Plaintiff's claim was worth; ° That Plaintiff sustained soft tissue spinal injuries and a concussion, as well as numerous post-concussion residuals that continue to this day, and will be seeking past and future general damages related to the same, in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact; ° That Plaintiff's past medical specials to be sought at the time of trial include but are not necessarily limited to the amounts Plaintiff requested Defendant State Farm admit to in its request for admissions regarding the medical bills, and as outlined in the expert report of Wendy Votroubek. State Farm will pursue the following affirmative defenses at trial: 1. Plaintiff failed to mitigate, minimize, or avoid the damages allegedly sustained and recovery, if any, should be reduced accordingly. 2. Plaintiffs alleged injuries have been proximately caused, in whole or in part, by his own negligence and/or comparative fault, and such damages are to be apportioned at trial pursuant to RCW 4.22.055, RCW 4.22.070 and related laws. 3. Plaintiffs claim is barred to the extent the alleged injuries, in whole or in part, resulted from pre-existing and/or unrelated medical conditions. 4. Plaintiff's claim is barred to the extent the alleged injuries, in whole or in part, resulted from an intervening or superseding cause. 5. Plaintiff has failed to prove those issues on which she has the burden of proof. DECLARATION OF SERVICE
6. Plaintiff has been paid for all, or some, of her alleged damages and injuries and is not entitled to a double recovery. To the extent said damages have already been paid by State Farm, any tortfeasor(s), and/or any other insurance company on their behalf, State Farm is entitled to a credit and/or offset. State Farm recognizes that this is not an issue for the Court to decide in this bench trial. Rather, to the extent the UIM coverage under plaintiffs State Farm- issued policy is triggered after any award by this Court, State Farm will ask the Court to determine whether and to what extent State Farm is entitled to any offsets.
ADMITTED FACTS The following facts are admitted by the parties: e That Defendant State Farm is an insurer doing business in the State of Washington; ° That Plaintiff had a valid and applicable policy of insurance with State Farm that had PIP and UIM coverage included, which was in effect when the subject collision occurred; ° That Plaintiff made a claim for UIM benefits under the State Farm policy;
ISSUES OF LAW The following are the issues of law to be determined by the court. To Plaintiff's understanding issues in the case are issues of fact/causation, namely: whether the auto collision of 2014 caused the injuries Plaintiff has alleged (soft tissue spinal injuries and concussion/post- concussion residuals), and if so what economic and non-economic damages were caused by those injuries. Defendant State Farm does not dispute that if Plaintiff's total damages are found at trial to be in excess of the insurance proceeds obtained by Plaintiff already (consisting of the underinsured driver’s liability policy limits together with personal injury protection (PIP) DECLARATION OF SERVICE
benefits paid by Defendant State Farm) that Plaintiff would be entitled to underinsured benefits from State Farm. In the practice of resolving UIM disputes at trial or arbitration, in the experience of counsel for both Plaintiff and Defendant, the factfinder is not told of what the underlying liability policy limits are, nor what the underinsured motorist policy limits are, so that the factfinder can make a determination of the amount of damages Plaintiff sustained, if any, free from any influence that the policy limits on either side might provide. The applicable insurance limits are then applied to come to an accurate and appropriate award/judgment. The parties wish it to be so here. If the Court so approves, the parties will be entering into a stipulation as to the amounts of the applicable insurance limits that will allow the Court to apply those limits in the event of a factual determination that Plaintiff sustained damages due to the auto collision. The parties would then request that the Court not review the stipulation until after the issues of causation and damages are resolved at trial. The parties are of course open to guidance from the Court as to the procedural mechanism the Court prefers to accomplish this. Here are the parties’ Issues of Law: 1. The nature and extent of plaintiff's accident-related injuries and damages. 2. Whether plaintiff failed to mitigate, minimize, or avoid the damages allegedly sustained. If so, to what extent should her recovery, if any, be reduced? 3. Whether on August 27, 2014, plaintiff was struck by an “underinsured motor vehicle,” as that term is defined in the subject insurance policy, such that plaintiff is entitled to contractual Underinsured Motorist benefits.
4. If plaintiff is entitled to Underinsured Motorist benefits under the subject policy, what is the appropriate amount after accounting for applicable apportionments, offsets, and/or policy limits?
EXPERT WITNESSES (a) Each party shall be limited to the expert witnesses they have previously identified and disclosed on the issues of injury causation and damages. (b) The name(s) and addresses of the expert witness(es) to be used by each party at the trial and the issue upon which each will testify is: (1) On behalf of Plaintiff; i. Nicholas Baker, DC, 1328 NW 6" St., Grants Pass, OR 97526 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video- taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 26 minutes). ii. Joanna Carter, OD, 814 E. Jackson St., Suite A, Medford, OR 97504 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video-taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 17 minutes), iii. Douglas Col, Ph.D., 542 Washington St., Suite 200, Ashland, OR 97520 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video-taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 29 minutes). iv. Eric Dukes, OD, 2325 Ashland St., Ashland, OR 97520 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video-taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 36 minutes). v. Heather Kahn, MD, 1215 NE 7" St., Grants Pass, OR 97526 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video- DECLARATION OF SERVICE
taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 14 minutes). vi.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hon. Ronald B. Leighton
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
ANAJEAN PENNY, | Case No. 3:18-cv-05195-RBL Plaintiff, PRETRIAL ORDER VS. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. JURISDICTION Plaintiff filed this claim originally in state court, Superior Court of Washington for the County of Clark. Defendant removed the case to the Federal Court based upon diversity of citizenship under 28 USC Sec. 1332 and 1446.
CLAIMS AND DEFENSES Plaintiff intends to pursue the claims she alleged in her Complaint, namely: e That on August 27, 2014, Plaintiff was involved in an automobile collision in Vancouver, Washington that was caused by the negligence of Nelda Lindell; that as a direct and
DECLARATION OF SERVICE
proximate result of the collision and Ms, Lindell’s negligence that Plaintiff sustained extensive personal injuries and incurred substantial medical expense, and other economic and non- economic damages in an amount to be determined at trial; ° That Ms. Lindell was underinsured, and that Plaintiff’s underinsured motorist coverage with Defendant State Farm required State Farm to pay the difference between Ms. Lindell’s policy limits and what Plaintiff's claim was worth; ° That Plaintiff sustained soft tissue spinal injuries and a concussion, as well as numerous post-concussion residuals that continue to this day, and will be seeking past and future general damages related to the same, in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact; ° That Plaintiff's past medical specials to be sought at the time of trial include but are not necessarily limited to the amounts Plaintiff requested Defendant State Farm admit to in its request for admissions regarding the medical bills, and as outlined in the expert report of Wendy Votroubek. State Farm will pursue the following affirmative defenses at trial: 1. Plaintiff failed to mitigate, minimize, or avoid the damages allegedly sustained and recovery, if any, should be reduced accordingly. 2. Plaintiffs alleged injuries have been proximately caused, in whole or in part, by his own negligence and/or comparative fault, and such damages are to be apportioned at trial pursuant to RCW 4.22.055, RCW 4.22.070 and related laws. 3. Plaintiffs claim is barred to the extent the alleged injuries, in whole or in part, resulted from pre-existing and/or unrelated medical conditions. 4. Plaintiff's claim is barred to the extent the alleged injuries, in whole or in part, resulted from an intervening or superseding cause. 5. Plaintiff has failed to prove those issues on which she has the burden of proof. DECLARATION OF SERVICE
6. Plaintiff has been paid for all, or some, of her alleged damages and injuries and is not entitled to a double recovery. To the extent said damages have already been paid by State Farm, any tortfeasor(s), and/or any other insurance company on their behalf, State Farm is entitled to a credit and/or offset. State Farm recognizes that this is not an issue for the Court to decide in this bench trial. Rather, to the extent the UIM coverage under plaintiffs State Farm- issued policy is triggered after any award by this Court, State Farm will ask the Court to determine whether and to what extent State Farm is entitled to any offsets.
ADMITTED FACTS The following facts are admitted by the parties: e That Defendant State Farm is an insurer doing business in the State of Washington; ° That Plaintiff had a valid and applicable policy of insurance with State Farm that had PIP and UIM coverage included, which was in effect when the subject collision occurred; ° That Plaintiff made a claim for UIM benefits under the State Farm policy;
ISSUES OF LAW The following are the issues of law to be determined by the court. To Plaintiff's understanding issues in the case are issues of fact/causation, namely: whether the auto collision of 2014 caused the injuries Plaintiff has alleged (soft tissue spinal injuries and concussion/post- concussion residuals), and if so what economic and non-economic damages were caused by those injuries. Defendant State Farm does not dispute that if Plaintiff's total damages are found at trial to be in excess of the insurance proceeds obtained by Plaintiff already (consisting of the underinsured driver’s liability policy limits together with personal injury protection (PIP) DECLARATION OF SERVICE
benefits paid by Defendant State Farm) that Plaintiff would be entitled to underinsured benefits from State Farm. In the practice of resolving UIM disputes at trial or arbitration, in the experience of counsel for both Plaintiff and Defendant, the factfinder is not told of what the underlying liability policy limits are, nor what the underinsured motorist policy limits are, so that the factfinder can make a determination of the amount of damages Plaintiff sustained, if any, free from any influence that the policy limits on either side might provide. The applicable insurance limits are then applied to come to an accurate and appropriate award/judgment. The parties wish it to be so here. If the Court so approves, the parties will be entering into a stipulation as to the amounts of the applicable insurance limits that will allow the Court to apply those limits in the event of a factual determination that Plaintiff sustained damages due to the auto collision. The parties would then request that the Court not review the stipulation until after the issues of causation and damages are resolved at trial. The parties are of course open to guidance from the Court as to the procedural mechanism the Court prefers to accomplish this. Here are the parties’ Issues of Law: 1. The nature and extent of plaintiff's accident-related injuries and damages. 2. Whether plaintiff failed to mitigate, minimize, or avoid the damages allegedly sustained. If so, to what extent should her recovery, if any, be reduced? 3. Whether on August 27, 2014, plaintiff was struck by an “underinsured motor vehicle,” as that term is defined in the subject insurance policy, such that plaintiff is entitled to contractual Underinsured Motorist benefits.
4. If plaintiff is entitled to Underinsured Motorist benefits under the subject policy, what is the appropriate amount after accounting for applicable apportionments, offsets, and/or policy limits?
EXPERT WITNESSES (a) Each party shall be limited to the expert witnesses they have previously identified and disclosed on the issues of injury causation and damages. (b) The name(s) and addresses of the expert witness(es) to be used by each party at the trial and the issue upon which each will testify is: (1) On behalf of Plaintiff; i. Nicholas Baker, DC, 1328 NW 6" St., Grants Pass, OR 97526 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video- taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 26 minutes). ii. Joanna Carter, OD, 814 E. Jackson St., Suite A, Medford, OR 97504 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video-taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 17 minutes), iii. Douglas Col, Ph.D., 542 Washington St., Suite 200, Ashland, OR 97520 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video-taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 29 minutes). iv. Eric Dukes, OD, 2325 Ashland St., Ashland, OR 97520 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video-taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 36 minutes). v. Heather Kahn, MD, 1215 NE 7" St., Grants Pass, OR 97526 (will testify). This provider has already been perpetuated and their video- DECLARATION OF SERVICE
taped testimony will be played (1 hour and 14 minutes). vi. Wendy Votroubek, RN, 4207 SE Woodstock Blvd., #365, Portland, OR 97206. Plaintiff has identified Ms. Votroubek to testify as to the reasonableness of the amount of the medical bills, see Plaintiff’s prior Expert Witness Disclosures and her report. Her testimony may be updated from the report to reflect any bills that have come in in the interim. She is expected to testify that the amounts of the charges are in line with those typically charged in the area where the treatment was obtained and that those amounts are reasonable. (2) On behalf of Defendant:
1. Josef K. Eichinger, MD c/o Physician Direct Services 2409 Pacific Ave SE Olympia, WA 98501 360.867.4188 Dr. Eichinger is a Board Certified Orthopaedic Surgeon. Dr. Eichinger will be called to testify regarding his opinions, based upon his review of plaintiff's medical records and his physical examination of plaintiff, as to the nature and extent of plaintiff's alleged accident-related injuries, the reasonableness and necessity of plaintiff's medical treatment following the subject accident, and whether plaintiff requires any future medical treatment related to the subject accident. 2. Samuel E. Coor, DO c/o Physician Direct Services 2409 Pacific Ave SE Olympia, WA 98501 360.867.4188 Dr. Coor is a Board Certified Osteopathic Neurologist and Psychiatrist. Dr. Coor will be called to testify regarding his opinions, based upon his review of plaintiff's medical records and his physical examination of plaintiff, as to the nature and extent of plaintiff's alleged accident-related injuries, the reasonableness and necessity of plaintiff's medical treatment following the subject accident, and whether plaintiff requires any future medical treatment related to the subject accident.
3. Lee H. Doppelt, Ph.D. c/o Physician Direct Services 2409 Pacific Ave SE Olympia, WA 98501 360.867.4188 Dr. Doppelt is a Licensed Psychologist and Clinical Neuropsychologist. Dr. Doppelt will be called to testify regarding his opinions, based upon his review of plaintiff’s medical records and his neuropsychological evaluation of plaintiff, as to the nature and extent of plaintiffs alleged accident- related neurological deficiencies, the reasonableness and necessity of plaintiff’s medical treatment following the subject accident, and whether plaintiff requires any future medical treatment related to the subject accident. Dr. Doppelt is further expected to offer rebuttal testimony related to the testimony and opinions of Dr. Douglas Col. OTHER WITNESSES The names and addresses of witnesses, other than experts, to be used by each party at the time of trial and the general nature of the testimony of each are: (a) On behalf of Plaintiff: 1. Duncan Canon, 2847 SW Esther Ln., Grants Pass, OR 97527. This witness will testify as to their observations of the difficulties and challenges that Plaintiff's symptoms following her auto collision have caused in her life. (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). 2. Jo Henry, 5076 Leonard Rd., Space #7, Grants Pass, OR 97527. This witness will testify as to their observations of the difficulties and challenges that Plaintiff's symptoms following her auto collision have caused in her life. (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). 3. Judy Jimenez, 790 SW Second St., Irrigon, OR 97844. This witness will testify as to their observations of the difficulties and challenges that Plaintiff’ s DECLARATION OF SERVICE
symptoms following her auto collision have caused in her life (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). 4. Lorajean Kelley, 2926 NE 89" Ave., Portland, OR 97220. This witness will testify as to their observations of the difficulties and challenges that Plaintiff's symptoms following her auto collision have caused in her life (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). 5. Grace Lee, PO Box 82863, Portland, OR 97282. This witness will testify as to their observations of the difficulties and challenges that Plaintiff's symptoms following her auto collision have caused in her life (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). 6. Faith Leming, 5076 Leonard Rd., Space #96, Grants Pass, OR 97527. This witness will testify as to their observations of the difficulties and challenges that Plaintiff's symptoms following her auto collision have caused in her life (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). 7. Erika Madrigal, 7208 NE Lessard Rd., Camas, WA 98607. This witness will testify as to their observations of the difficulties and challenges that Plaintiff's symptoms following her auto collision have caused in her life (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). 8. Melissa Newstrand, aka Melissa Hiller, 5076 Leonard Rd., Space #4, Grants Pass, OR 97527. This witness will testify as to their observations of the difficulties and challenges that Plaintiff's symptoms following her auto
collision have caused in her life (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). 9, Sandra Khalife, Pemco Insurance. This witness will testify as to the authenticity of the Pemco declarations page for Nelda Lindell’s liability insurance policy, if Defendant refuses to stipulate to authenticity (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). 10. Anajean Penny, c/o Scott A. Staples, 1700 E. Fourth Plain Blvd., Vancouver, WA 98661 (will testify). 11. Nelda Lindell. This witness will testify as to the authenticity of the Pemco declarations page for Nelda Lindell’s liability insurance policy, if Defendant refuses to stipulate to authenticity (possible witness, pending new trial date and any scheduling issues that causes). (b) On behalf of Defendant:
1. Anajean Penny c/o Schauermann Thayer Jacobs Staples & Edwards 1700 E Fourth Plain Blvd Vancouver, WA 98661 360.695.4244 Ms. Penny may be called to testify regarding the facts and circumstances of the subject accident, the nature and extent of her alleged injuries and damages, the nature and extent of the medical treatment she received in connection with her alleged accident-related injuries, her medical history, and any prior and/or subsequent injuries or medical conditions.
PLAINTIFF’S EXHIBITS Ex. # Authenticity | Admissibility | Objection | Admitted 1. American Medical Reserved Response Medical Bill DECLARATION OF SERVICE
Admissbly Amie 2. Legacy Salmon Creek Reserved Hospital Medical Bill 3. Vancouver Radiologists Reserved Medical Bill 4. AFC Urgent Care Medical Reserved Bill 5. Motion Chiropractic Reserved Medical Bills 6. Evergreen Medical Center Reserved Medical Bills 7. PeaceHealth Med. Ctr. Reserved Medical Bill 8. Vancouver Heights Reserved Imaging Medical Bill PeaceHealth Neurology Reserved Medical Bills 10. Whatcom PT Medical Bills } | Reserved Sf 11. Asante Physicians Medical Reserved Bills 12. Asante Three Rivers Reserved Medical Bill 13. Advanced Imaging Reserved Medical Bill 14. | Cascade Eye Center Reserved Medical Bill 15. Providence Health Medical Reserved Bills
18. Visiting Angels Medical Reserved Bill 19. Linnemeyer LMT Medical Reserved Bills DECLARATION OF SERVICE
Ex. # Description Admissibility Admitted 20. Eye Care Group Medical Reserved Bills Mitchell Pharmacy Bill || Reserved
23. Perpetuation deposition of Reserved Douglas Col, Ph.D. 24. Dr. Col CV (Deposition Reserved Exhibit #1) 25. Dr. Col 2016 Report Reserved (Deposition Exhibit #2) 26. | May 2019 Dr. Col Letter Reserved (Deposition Exhibit #3) 27. Dr. Col Medical Bills Reserved (Deposition Exhibit #4) 28. Perpetuation deposition of Reserved MIL; E Heather Kahn, M.D. 29. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 7/22/15 (Deposition Exhibit #1) 30. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 9/2/15 (Deposition Exhibit #2) 31. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 10/9/15 (Deposition Exhibit #3) 32. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 11/9/15 (Deposition Exhibit #4) 33. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 12/7/15 (Deposition Exhibit #5) 34. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 1/14/16 (Deposition Exhibit #6)
Ex. # Description Authenticity | Admissibility Admitted 35. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 1/26/16 (Deposition Exhibit #7) 36. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 2/16/16 (Deposition Exhibit #8) 37. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 2/24/16 (Deposition Exhibit #9) 38. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 3/2/16 (Deposition Exhibit #10) 39. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 3/31/16 (Deposition Exhibit #11) 40. | Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 4/6/16 (Deposition Exhibit #12) 4]. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 4/13/16 (Deposition Exhibit #13) 42. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved _5/4/16 (Deposition Exhibit #14) 43. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 6/8/16 (Deposition Exhibit #15) 44, Dr. Kahn Medical Record | Reserved 6/15/16 (Deposition Exhibit #16) 45. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 6/30/16 (Deposition | Exhibit #17) 46. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 8/15/16 (Deposition Exhibit #18) 47. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 10/19/16 (Deposition Exhibit #19) DECLARATION OF SERVICE
Admissibility | Objection | Admitted 48. Dr. Kahn Medical Record Reserved 5/1/17 (Deposition Exhibit #20) 49. | Dr. Kahn Medical Bills Reserved (Deposition Exhibit #21) 50. Perpetuation deposition of Reserved MIL; E | Eric Dukes, O.D. 51. Dr. Dukes Medical Record Reserved 8/26/19-10/3/19 (Deposition Exhibit #1) 52. Dr. Dukes Medical Record Reserved 11/25/19 (Deposition Exhibit #2) 53. Dr. Dukes Medical Record Reserved 12/23/19 (Deposition Exhibit #3) 54. Perpetuation deposition of | Reserved MIL; E Nicholas Baker, D.C. 55. Dr. Baker Medical Records Reserved 2/10/15-8/30/19 (Deposition Exhibit #1) 56. Dr. Baker Medical Bills Reserved (Deposition Exhibit #2) 57. Perpetuation deposition of Reserved MIL; E Joanna Carter, O.D. 58. Dr. Carter Medical Reserved Records (Deposition Exhibit #1) 59. Dr. Carter Medical Reserved Records (Deposition Exhibit #2) Dr. Carter Medical Reserved Records (Deposition Exhibit #3) 61. Dr. Carter Medical | Reserved Records (Deposition Exhibit #4)
Ex. # Authenticity | Admissibility | Objection | Admitted 62. Dr. Carter Medical Reserved Records (Deposition | Exhibit #5) 63. Dr. Carter Medical Bills Reserved. (Deposition Exhibit #6) 64. 9-1-1 audio recording | Reserved
Vancouver Police Report, Reserved Case #14-13138 67. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 68. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 69. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 70. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 71. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 72. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle B. | Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 74. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 75. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 76. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 77. Photograph of Lindell’s Reserved Vehicle 78. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 79. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle | DECLARATION OF SERVICE
Ex. # Description Authenticity | Admissibility | Objection | Admitted 80. Photograph of Lindell’s Reserved Vehicle 81. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 82. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle 83. Photograph of Lindell’s Reserved Vehicle 84. Photograph of Lindell’s Reserved Vehicle 85. Photograph of Plaintiff's Reserved Vehicle Photograph of Lindell’s Reserved Vehicle 87. Police Collage of Reserved photographs of Scene 88. Police Collage of Reserved photographs of Scene Plaintiff Vehicle Repair Reserved Estimate 90. Plaintiff's Education Reserved records 91. Pemco Insurance Reserved Declaration Page for Lindell 92. State Farm’s Declarations Reserved Page for Plaintiff
94. DVD of Perpetuation Reserved MIL Deposition of Dr. Col 95. DVD of Perpetuation Reserved MIL; E Deposition of Dr. Kahn 96. DVD of Perpetuation Reserved MIL; E Deposition of Dr. Dukes 97. | DVD of Perpetuation Reserved MIL; E Deposition of Dr. Baker DECLARATION OF SERVICE
Authenticity | Admissibility | Objection | Admitted DVD of Perpetuation Reserved MIL; E Deposition of Dr. Carter
DEFENDANT’S EXHIBITS
Ex.# Admissibility | Objection | Admitted Al. | CV—Lee H. Doppelt, Reserved Ph.D. A2. | Independent Reserved Neuropsychological Evaluation by Dr. Doppelt dated 10/30/17 A3. | Rebuttal Report by Dr. Reserved | Doppelt dated 09/23/19 A4. | Addendum by Dr. Doppelt Reserved dated 10/25/19 A5. | Addendum by Dr. Doppelt Reserved dated 01/13/20 A6. | Medical Record Excerpt: _ Reserved 07/03/07 — The Vancouver Clinic — Encounter Note A7. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 07/26/10 — Valley View Health Center, Office Visit | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 10/14/10 — Valley View Health Center, Follow-up A9. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 02/28/11 — Washington Orthopedic Center, Follow-up A 10. | Medical Records Excerpt: Reserved 06/17/13 — WCH Physical Therapy, Assessment
Ex. # Authenticity | Admissibility | Objection | Admitted All. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 08/27/14 — American Medical Response, Patient Care Report A 12. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 08/27/14 — Legacy Salmon Creek Medical Center, ED Notes A 13. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 08/27/14 — Legacy Salmon Creek Medical Center, CT head A 14. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 09/01/14 — Motion Chiropractic, Patient Summary A 15. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved | 10/01/14 — Dr. Nelson, Asante Neurology, Encounter Note A 16. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 12/17/14 — Dr. Nelson, Asante Neurology, Follow- up 17. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 08/27/15 — Dr. Sanchez, Asante Neurology, Office Visit A 18. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 10/02/15 — Florence Nikas, LPC, Service Plan A 19. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 11/02/15 — Three Rivers Radiology Associates, MRI A 20. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 01/12/16 — American Medical Response, Patient Care Report DECLARATION OF SERVICE
Authenticity | Admissibility | Objection | Admitted | □□□ | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 01/12/16 — Asante, ED Encounter A 22. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 02/02/16 — Cascade Eyecare Center, Encounter Note | A23. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 05/05/16 — Dr. Sanchez, Asante Neurology, Follow- up CV — Samuel Coor, D.O. Po Reserved | A 25. | Independent Medical Reserved Review by Dr. Coor dated March 20, 2019 A 26. | Addendum by Dr. Coor Reserved dated January 7, 2020 A 27. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 03/22/01 — Southwest WA Medical Center, ED Record 28. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 08/02/02 — Southwest Medical Center, Discharge Summary A 29. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 05/06/04 — Southwest Medical Center, CT report head A 30. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 05/07/04 — Southwest Medical Center, MRI report head 31. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 06/22/06 — The Vancouver Clinic, Evaluation A 32. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 07/03/07 — The Vancouver Clinic, Urgent Care DECLARATION OF SERVICE
Admissibility | Objection | Admited | A 33. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 05/06/08 — Southwest Medical Center, ED Records A 34. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 07/26/10 — Valley View Health, Office Visit A 35. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 10/14/10 — Valley View Health, Office Visit A 36. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 08/18/12 — Woodland Urgent Care, Office Visit, Imaging A 37. | CV —Josef K. Eichinger, Reserved M.D. A 38. | Independent Medical Reserved Record Review by Dr. Eichinger dated March 20, 2019 | 39. | CR 35 Panel Evaluation Reserved Report by Dr. Eichinger and Dr. Coor dated December 9, 2019 A 40. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 05/06/04 — Southwest Medical Center, ED Record 41. | Medical Record Excerpt: | Reserved 02/26/08 — Southwest Medical Center, Office Visit A 42. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 01/19/11 — Washington | Orthopedic Center, x-ray right wrist
Ex. # Admissibility | Objection | Admitted A 43. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 01/20/11 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up A 44. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 01/27/11 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up A 45. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 02/03/11 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, | Follow-up, Imaging A 46. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 02/17/11 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up, Imaging 47. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 02/28/11 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up A 48. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 03/10/11 — Washington | Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up, Imaging 49. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 03/29/11 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up, Imaging A 50. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved | 05/09/11 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up 51. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 06/10/11 — Washington | Orthopaedic Center, | Follow-up A 52. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 06/13/11 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up, Imaging DECLARATION OF SERVICE
A 53. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 11/03/11 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up A 54. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 07/17/12 — Providence, ED Records, Imaging 'A55. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 07/18/12 — Providence, Consultation A 56. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 07/27/12 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Office Visit, Imaging A 57. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 08/01/12 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up | 58. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 08/13/12 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up A 59. | Medical Record Excerpt: | Reserved 08/27/12 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up A 60. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 09/07/12 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up A 61. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 09/24/12 — Washington | Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up A 62. | Medical Record Excerpt: | Reserved 10/09/12 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up
Ex.# Authenticity | Admissibility | Objection | Admitted A 63. | Medical Record Excerpt: Reserved 11/09/12 — Washington Orthopaedic Center, Follow-up, Imaging A 64. | Medical Record Excerpt: | Reserved 11/26/13 — Woodland | Urgent Care, CT pelvis A 65. | Medical Record Excerpt: | Reserved 08/27/14 — Southwest Medical Center, x-ray report wrist The Parties’ Objection Code: E Exhibit is objectionable because it constitutes attempted expert testimony from a person who was not designated as an expert (Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 □ F Lack of Foundation MIL | Subject of Motion in Limine
In the Authenticity and Admissibility columns, indicate “Stipulated” or “Disputed”. If “Disputed”, identify the objection in the Objection column. An objection based on a Fed. R. Evid. Should reference the rule number; additional objections should be referenced by a code that the parties include with the exhibit list. The “Admitted” column is for use by the Court. (No party is required to list any exhibit which is listed by another party, or any exhibit to be used for impeachment only. See LCR 16 for further explanation of numbering of exhibits).
ACTION BY THE COURT (a) This case is set for a bench trial. Due to Judge Leighton’s pending retirement and August schedule, the August trial dates previously given have been stricken. The case is currently without a trial date, pending assignment to a new judge. The parties have jointly requested that the new trial date be scheduled far enough in the future to allow for
witnesses to have adequate notice of the proceedings and for counsel to avoid existing conflicts on their calendars. (b) The parties request that deadlines for submission of trial briefs, jury instructions, and other pretrial documents be scheduled by the new judge in relation to the new trial date.
This order has been approved by the parties as evidenced by the signatures of their counsel. This order shall control the subsequent course of the action unless modified by a subsequent order. This order shall not be amended except by order of the court pursuant to agreement of the parties or to prevent manifest injustice. DATED this 5th day of _ November 2920.
United ro District Judge/Magistrate Judge FORM APPROVED /s/ Scott A. Staples Attomey for Plaintiff
/s/ Vasu Addanki Attorney for Defendant