On August 10, 2016 a
Party Discovery
was filed
involving a dispute between
Bush, Lori,
Dignity Health, A Califonia Corporation,
and
Dignity Health, A Califonia Corporation,
St. Bernadine Medical Center A Business Entity Unknown,
Total Professional Network, Inc,
for Medical Malpractice Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
J
1
MICHAEL J LIBMAN SBN 222353
THE LAW OFFICES OF 1VIICHAEL J LIBMAN
2
18321 Ventura Boulevard Suite 700
s Tarzana Califomia 91356
Telephone 81 8 995 7300 F I L E D
SUPERIOR COURT OF CRLIFORNIA
4
Facsimile 866 644 6764 coutvn oF saN s RNARoitvo
SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT
7 111 IiblYfpYlICtl tt COJYt
y
SEP 2 9 2017
GARY BERKQVICH SBN 1 92731
6
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATiON
sY
14900 Ventura Boulevard Suite 220
ANNE PERRY EPUTY
Sherman aks Galifornia 91403
8
Telephonec 818 465 9505
Facsimile 818 358 2829
y
Attorneys for Plaintiff LORI BUSH
io
11 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALCFORNIA
i 2 IOR T IE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO SAN BE RIVARDINO DISTRICT
i
LORI BUSH an individual GAS NO CIVllS 1 F 13161
i
Plaintiff Judge Hon John M Pacheco
5
vs Dept S31
SEPARATE STATEMENT OF ITEM5 IN
ST BERNARDINE MEDICAL CENTER a
DISPUTE WITH REASON TqR
business entity form uriknown DIGNITX
ls FURTI IER RESPnNSES TO DEMAND
FiEALTl I a California Corporation and FOIt P1Z ODUCTION OF DOGUMENTS i
9 DOES 1 through 200 inclusive
SET TWO
20
Defendants
21
22
23
DATE November 7 2017
z4 T ME 8 30 a m
DEPT S3l
25
26
21
I8
1
SF PARATE STATEIVTEN7 QT ITEMS IN DISPUTE WITH REASON I O1Z I UR CHER RESPO NSE
i R FPD SET TWO
i
1
TO DEFENDANT ANI I1 S COUNSEL OF RECOIzll
2
Plaintiff LORI BUSFI hereby submits her Separate Statement of Items in Dispute a
3
follows
4
L DEMANDS F OR PRODUCTYON OE D4C MENTS IN DISP UTE RESpOSNES
5
AND REASONS FOIt JLTSTIFYING A FURTHER VERII IED RESPONSE
6
DEMAND EOR P120DiICTION N0 47
All photographs of the hathroom where Plaintiff fell as identified in your response t
r
F Form Interrogatory No 12 4
9
RESPONSE TO DEMAND EOR PRODUCTION NO 47
lo Objection attorney client and oi work pi duct privilege pursuant to CCP 2018 O10 e
11
seq Objection this request is or tnay be violative of Evidence Code
1157 Specifically withou
1 2
waiving said objections and in the spirit of cooperation defendant responds defendant wil
1 3
comply by producing unprivileged documents not immune from discovery See response to iio
i
49
s
REASON FURTHE R RESPONSE IS REOUIRED
1h
Plairitiff deinanded all phot s of the bathrooin where ilaintiff fell photos of her knee an
all non privileged documents identified iii response to respcinses to the Special Interrogatoi ies
18
Set Two Defendant asserted attorney client privilege and work product to shield photos ari
l videos of the bathroom from discovery Under Suezaki v Superios Cour t 1993 58 Cal 2d 16 6
photos and videos are physical objects that are not subject to the work product or attorney clien
21
protection absent showing that they show Defendant s trial strategy or mental impressions
73
D EM AND 1 OR PRODUCTfON NO 48
All photographs of Plaintilf s knee as identified in your response to Forin Iiiterrogato
2 No 12 4
2 RESPONSE TO DElVIAND FO1t P ROID UCTION NO 48
27
Objection cl ient and or work product privilege pursuant to CCP 2018 0 O e
attorney
28 seq Objectiarr this request is or may be violative of vidence Code 1 157 Specifically withou
2
SEPARATE STATEMENT OF ITEIVIS 1N llISPUTE WITH REASON FOR FURTHER RESPONSE
RFPD SI T TWO
Document Filed Date
September 29, 2017
Case Filing Date
August 10, 2016
Category
Medical Malpractice Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.