Preview
Filing # 158382959 E-Filed 09/30/2022 03:15:33 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA
ERLENE FEDRICK, CASE NO.: 2022-CA-000754
Plaintiff,
Vv.
PATRICK DONALD HENES and
ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY,
a Foreign Profit Corporation,
Defendants.
/
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, PATRICK DONALD HENES.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION
Plaintiff, ERLENE FEDRICK, by and through the undersigned counsel, hereby responds
to Defendant, PATRICK DONALD HENES’, Request to Produce, as follows:
1 Any and all medical bills, hospital bills, dental bills, nursing bills, pharmaceutical bills, or
other bills, which allegedly support the Plaintiff's claim for damages.
Response: Plaintiff’s medical bills.
Any and all hospital records, medical records, copies of all x-ray, CT scans and/or MRI
films of any treating and/or examining physician or health care provider regarding the
Plaintiff's injuries allegedly sustained by the incident giving rise to this lawsuit.
Response: Plaintiff’s medical records.
Any and all photographs, drawings and/or motion pictures of the Plaintiff depicting any
alleged injuries suffered by the Plaintiff as a result of the subject incident, including a
photograph of the Plaintiff taken within six (6) months preceding Plaintiff's alleged
injuries.
Response: Attached is a photograph depicting Plaintiff’s injuries suffered as a
result of the subject incident. A photograph of Plaintiff taken within six months
preceding Plaintiff’s injuries has been requested and will be produced upon receipt
to the extent same exists.
4 Any and all statements previously made by the Plaintiff herein or Plaintiff's agents.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
FILED: LAKE COUNTY, GARY J. COONEY, CLERK, 10/04/2022 10:24:12 AM
Any and all records pertaining to payments made to the Plaintiff arising from the subject
incident pursuant to:
a. the United States Social Security Act; any federal, state or local disability act; or
any other public programs providing medical expenses, disability payments or
other similar benefits;
any health, sickness or disability income insurance, and any other similar benefits;
any contract or agreements of any group, organization, partnership or corporation
to provide, pay for, or reimburse costs of hospital, medical or other health care
services;
any contractual or voluntary wage contribution plan provided by any employers
of the Plaintiff or any other system intended to provide wages during any period
of alleged disability of such individual.
Response: The Zenith’s ledger.
True copies of any and all federal income tax returns, W-2 withholding tax statements
and any and all business records, paid receipts and other memoranda in the possession,
custody or control of the Plaintiff indicating the Plaintiff's gross income, including self-
employment, employment, salaries, commissions, bonuses, investments, credits and/or
reimbursements for business expenses, for the past seven (7) years together with an in
addition to income to date.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
Any and all reports from experts whom you intend to call at the time of trial.
Response: Undetermined at this time. However, Plaintiff will comply with the
Court’s Trial Order regarding disclosure of experts and materials.
Copy of the Curriculum Vitae of any and all experts whom you intend to call at the time
of trial.
Response: Undetermined at this time. However, Plaintiff will comply with the
Court’s Trial Order regarding disclosure of experts and materials.
With respect to the alleged injuries at issue in this action, any and all medical records
from hospitals or any other health care facility, including all information related to
treatments, prognosis, diagnosis, and physical or mental histories made or maintained by
the health care professionals identified in response to the interrogatories to Plaintiff.
Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 2.
10. All documents which refer or relate to any other lawsuits in which Plaintiff has been a
plaintiff in a personal injury matter.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
11. All documents relied upon in compiling your response to the interrogatories and request
for production.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of any additional documents responsive to
this request.
12 Any and all policies of insurance in force on the date of the incident complained of herein
that may provide coverage to Plaintiff for the injuries as alleged by Plaintiff in Plaintiff's
Complaint.
Response: Arch Insurance Company’s Declarations Page.
13 Any and all documents which purport to support Plaintiffs allegation of negligence
against Defendant.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
14 Any and all documents which purport to support wage loss of Plaintiff.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
15 Any and all documents which evidence prior injury, illness or disease to the part of the
body to which Plaintiff claims injury in Plaintiffs Complaint.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
16 Any and all documents which evidence prior suits brought by or against Plaintiff.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
17. Plaintiffs complete Personal Injury Protection or No-Fault file for this accident.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
18. A copy of Plaintiff's application for Personal Injury Protection or No-Fault benefits.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
19. Any and all documents which were obtained from, created or generated by Defendant.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
20. Any and all documents which evidence that Plaintiff was injured in this accident.
Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 2.
21. All documents from Plaintiffs health insurer indicating payment for medical treatment
relating to the injuries Plaintiff claims to have sustained in this accident.
Response: The Rawlings Company ledger.
22 All correspondence to and from the police or district attorney relative to this accident.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
23 Copies of pleadings relative to any litigation with Plaintiff's No-Fault insurer.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
24 Copies of all pleadings and answers relative to any and all personal injury protection
benefit or claim litigation.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
25 Copies of all applications for No-Fault benefits and/or PIP benefits, copies of all
correspondence to and from Plaintiff's PIP insurance carrier, as well as copies of all
denials of benefits from Progressive.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
26 Copies of all records obtained by a records request for any reports or documents
concerning this alleged incident.
Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 2.
27. Copies of all of Plaintiff's Letters of Protection executed by Plaintiff to any healthcare
provider listed in Plaintiff's interrogatory responses.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
28 Photocopies of receipts, statements, invoices, checks, canceled checks, explanations of
benefits, benefits statements, or other documents or tangible evidence representing
expenses of any kind which are claimed to be recoverable in this proceeding, including,
but not limited to: expenses from physician examinations, tests, and treatment, therapy,
nursing care, hospital and/or institutional care, ambulance services, medications
(prescription or otherwise), domestic or household services, services for which you paid
money or became liable for payment of money for any and all goods or services which
Plaintiff believes were necessitated by the incident complained of in this proceeding.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
29. Copies of all medical reports received by the Plaintiff or Plaintiff's attorneys,
investigators, servants, or employees from any physician, hospital, or any practitioner
who has rendered treatment to the Plaintiff for injuries incurred as a result of the incident
which is the subject of this lawsuit.
Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 2.
30. Copies of all hospital records from any hospital where each Plaintiff has been a patient
(whether an in-patient or out-patient) subsequent to the incident which is the subject of
this lawsuit, which are in the possession of the Plaintiff or Plaintiff's attorneys,
investigators, agents, servants, or employees.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
31 Complete copies of income tax returns and all schedules thereto, W-2 forms, and any
other documents evidencing income or compensation filed by the Plaintiff with the
United States Government or any state for the past five (5) years, and all documents
which constitute evidence of income to date for the current year.
Response: Plaintiff’s counsel will produce upon receipt, if any.
32. All written statements given by the Plaintiff concerning the subject of this lawsuit.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
33 Color photocopies of all original or duplicate original photographs in the possession of
the Plaintiff or Plaintiff's attorneys, investigators, agents, servants, or employees, which
are in any manner related to the subject matter of this lawsuit, including, but not limited,
to any photographs of the parties, any and all photographs of the vehicles and/or scene of
the subject incident, and any photographs upon which the Plaintiff intends to rely or use
at trial.
Response: Attached are photographs.
34, Any personal journal, diary, log, or other documents evidencing the activities, physical
complaints, and dates of examination or treatment of Plaintiff for injuries or damages
attributed to the incident in question for the period immediately subsequent to the
incident until the date of your response to this request, and color photocopies of any
photographs upon which the Plaintiff intends to rely or use at trial.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
35. True and correct photocopies of any insurance policies, declaration pages, applications
for benefits which afforded coverage to the Plaintiff for the injuries complained of in this
proceeding, including but not limited to, medical, hospitalization, Medicare, Medicaid,
disability, medical payments, personal injury protection, and health and accident.
Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 12.
36 Copies of any statutes, rules, regulations, ordinances, and other documents regulatory in
nature, upon which the Plaintiff bases Plaintiff's claim for damages in this proceeding.
Response: Undetermined at this time. Discovery is ongoing. Plaintiff reserves the
right to amend and/or supplement this response as more information becomes
available.
37. Copies of all lien letters or other statements asserting or alleging the existence of a lien by
any medical or other provider(s) for services received by Plaintiff as a result of the
injuries complained of in the Complaint.
Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s Response to Request for Production No. 21.
38. Any statements made by Plaintiff, written and recorded. This request includes audio and
videotapes of the Plaintiff.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
39. A copy of Plaintiff's passport.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
40. A copy of Plaintiff's driver’s license.
Response: Plaintiff’s driver’s license.
Al. A copy of the accident report.
Response: Florida Traffic Crash Report (#88310181)
42. A copy of Plaintiff's marriage certificate.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
43. Copies of your cellular/mobile telephone bills evidencing incoming and/or outgoing calls
for one hour prior to and one hour after the time of the subject motor vehicle accident or
if the bill is not in your possession please identify your cell phone number and carrier on
the date of loss.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
44, Any and all statement(s) of any witnesses to the subject incident, including the Defendant
herein.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
45 For each social networking account listed in response to the interrogatories, provide
copies or screenshots of all photographs associated with that account during the two (2)
years prior to the date of loss.
Response: Plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and
seeks information that is neither relevant, nor reasonably calculated to lead to the
discovery of admissible evidence. Courts routinely deny requests that amount to no
more than fishing expeditions for discovery of private social media pages where the
party fails to make a threshold showing to the relevancy of any information
contained on an individual’s private social networking websites, internet usage or
email addresses. See, e.g., Salvato v. Miley, No. 5:12-CV-635-Oc-10PRL, 2013 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 81784, at *6-7 (M.D. Fla. June 11, 2013) (“The mere hope that Brown’s
private text-messages, e-mails, and electronic communication might include an
admission against interest, without more, is not a sufficient reason to require Brown
to provide Plaintiff open access to her private communications with third parties.”);
McCann v. Harleysville Ins. Co., 910 N.Y.S.2d 614, 78 A.D.3d 1524 (N.Y. App. Div.
2010) (“Although defendant specified the type of evidence sought, it failed to
establish a factual predicate with respect to the relevancy of the evidence. Indeed,
defendant essentially sought permission to conduct “a fishing expedition” into
plaintiff's Facebook account based on the mere hope of finding relevant evidence.”)
(citations omitted); see also Crispin v. Christian Audigier, Inc., 717 F. Supp. 2d 965
(CD. Cal. 2010) (holding that Facebook and MySpace are Electronic
Communication Services, and thus subject to the Stored Communications Act, 18
U.S.C. § 2701 et seq.).
Further, Plaintiff has a right of privacy in her electronic communications which is
protected by the criminal laws of this State. Specifically, the propounder of this
discovery is prohibited from using a computer network, including Plaintiff's
computer network, to discover the information sought. See O.C.G.A. § 16-9-93(c)
which provides: “Any person who uses a computer or computer network with the
intention of examining any employment, medical, salary, credit, or any other
financial or personal data relating to any other person with knowledge that such
examination is without authority shall be guilty of the crime of computer invasion of
privacy.” Plaintiff does not grant authority for examination of her stored electronic
data.
46 For each social networking account listed in the interrogatories, provide copies or
screenshots of all photographs associated with that account from the date of loss to the
present.
Response: Plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and
seeks information that is neither relevant, nor reasonably calculated to lead to the
discovery of admissible evidence. Courts routinely deny requests that amount to no
more than fishing expeditions for discovery of private social media pages where the
party fails to make a threshold showing to the relevancy of any information
contained on an individual’s private social networking websites, internet usage or
email addresses. See, e.g., Salvato v. Miley, No. 5:12-CV-635-Oc-10PRL, 2013 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 81784, at *6-7 (M.D. Fla. June 11, 2013) (“The mere hope that Brown’s
private text-messages, e-mails, and electronic communication might include an
admission against interest, without more, is not a sufficient reason to require Brown
to provide Plaintiff open access to her private communications with third parties.”);
McCann vy. Harleysville Ins. Co., 910 N.Y.S.2d 614, 78 A.D.3d 1524 (N.Y. App. Div.
2010) (“Although defendant specified the type of evidence sought, it failed to
establish a factual predicate with respect to the relevancy of the evidence. Indeed,
defendant essentially sought permission to conduct “a fishing expedition” into
plaintiff's Facebook account based on the mere hope of finding relevant evidence.”)
(citations omitted); see also Crispin v. Christian Audigier, Inc., 717 F. Supp. 2d 965
(CD. Cal.2010) (holding that Facebook and MySpace are Electronic
Communication Services, and thus subject to the Stored Communications Act, 18
U.S.C. § 2701 et seq.).
Further, Plaintiff has a right of privacy in her electronic communications which is
protected by the criminal laws of this State. Specifically, the propounder of this
discovery is prohibited from using a computer network, including Plaintiff's
computer network, to discover the information sought. See O.C.G.A. § 16-9-93(c)
which provides: “Any person who uses a computer or computer network with the
intention of examining any employment, medical, salary, credit, or any other
financial or personal data relating to any other person with knowledge that such
examination is without authority shall be guilty of the crime of computer invasion of
privacy.” Plaintiff does not grant authority for examination of her stored electronic
data,
47 Electronic copies of all portions of your profile form social networking sites of which
Plaintiff is a member or holds an account, including but not limited to Facebook, Twitter,
Myspace, YouTube, LinkedIn, dating websites, etc. (including all updates, changes or
modifications to your profile) and all status updates, profile information or other updates,
messages, wall comments, causes joined, groups joined, activity streams, photographs,
tagged photographs, blog entries, details, blurbs, comments, and applications, from two
(2) years prior to the loss through today. To the extent electronic copies are unavailable,
please provide the documents in hard copy form.
Response: Plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and
seeks information that is neither relevant, nor reasonably calculated to lead to the
discovery of admissible evidence. Courts routinely deny requests that amount to no
more than fishing expeditions for discovery of private social media pages where the
party fails to make a threshold showing to the relevancy of any information
contained on an individual’s private social networking websites, internet usage or
email addresses. See, e.g., Salvato v. Miley, No. 5:12-CV-635-Oc-10PRL, 2013 U.S.
Dist. LEXIS 81784, at *6-7 (M.D. Fla. June 11, 2013) (“The mere hope that Brown’s
private text-messages, e-mails, and electronic communication might include an
admission against interest, without more, is not a sufficient reason to require Brown
to provide Plaintiff open access to her private communications with third parties.”);
McCann v. Harleysville Ins. Co., 910 N.Y.S.2d 614, 78 A.D.3d 1524 (N.Y. App. Div.
2010) (“Although defendant specified the type of evidence sought, it failed to
establish a factual predicate with respect to the relevancy of the evidence. Indeed,
defendant essentially sought permission to conduct “a fishing expedition” into
plaintiff's Facebook account based on the mere hope of finding relevant evidence.”)
(citations omitted); see also Crispin v. Christian Audigier, Inc., 717 F. Supp. 2d 965
(C.D. Cal. 2010) (holding that Facebook and MySpace are Electronic
Communication Services, and thus subject to the Stored Communications Act, 18
US.C. § 2701 et seq.).
Further, Plaintiff has a right of privacy in her electronic communications which is
protected by the criminal laws of this State. Specifically, the propounder of this
discovery is prohibited from using a computer network, including Plaintiff's
computer network, to discover the information sought. See O.C.G.A. § 16-9-93(c)
which provides: “Any person who uses a computer or computer network with the
intention of examining any employment, medical, salary, credit, or any other
financial or personal data relating to any other person with knowledge that such
examination is without authority shall be guilty of the crime of computer invasion of
privacy.” Plaintiff does not grant authority for examination of her stored electronic
data.
48 A true, complete and accurate copy of the owner’s manual for the vehicle you operated at
the time of the accident as alleged in the Complaint.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
49. A true, complete and accurate copy of any recording or other digital documentation of the
accident in question.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
50. A true, complete and accurate copy of any recording or other digital documentation
downloaded from any source that in any way relates to the accident in question. This
request includes, but is not limited to CAN Bus or similar information, from any body
shop, repair shop, dealer or any other person or entity that inspected and/or repaired the
vehicle you were operating at the time of the accident in question.
Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request.
Si. Please provide a copy of all notice letters to collateral sources pursuant to Florida Statute
768.76(6), along with the registered or certified mailing number and the signed certified
green card or other proof of receipt by the collateral source.
Response: Attached is a copy of Plaintiff’s correspondence to Florida Blue.
52. Please provide a copy of all responses to the notice letter(s) sent pursuant to Florida
Statute 768.76(6) from the collateral sources.
Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s Response to Request for Production No. 21.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 30" day of September 2022, I electronically filed the
foregoing with the Clerk of the Court via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, which will effect
service of the foregoing via electronic mail to all counsel of record.
/s/ Devry R. Kelley
Devry R. Kelley, Esquire
Florida Bar No.: 0567302
Dan Newlin Injury Attorneys
7335 W. Sand Lake Road, Suite 300
Orlando, FL 32819
Direct: (321) 270-0430
Fax: (863) 225-9853
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Devry.Kelley@newlinlaw.com
Devry.Pleadings@newlinlaw.com
Marlene.Zervos@newlinlaw.com
Preview
Filing # 158382959 E-Filed 09/30/2022 03:15:33 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA ERLENE FEDRICK, CASE NO.: 2022-CA-000754 Plaintiff, Vv. PATRICK DONALD HENES and ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, a Foreign Profit Corporation, Defendants. / PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT, PATRICK DONALD HENES. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION Plaintiff, ERLENE FEDRICK, by and through the undersigned counsel, hereby responds to Defendant, PATRICK DONALD HENES’, Request to Produce, as follows: 1 Any and all medical bills, hospital bills, dental bills, nursing bills, pharmaceutical bills, or other bills, which allegedly support the Plaintiff's claim for damages. Response: Plaintiff’s medical bills. Any and all hospital records, medical records, copies of all x-ray, CT scans and/or MRI films of any treating and/or examining physician or health care provider regarding the Plaintiff's injuries allegedly sustained by the incident giving rise to this lawsuit. Response: Plaintiff’s medical records. Any and all photographs, drawings and/or motion pictures of the Plaintiff depicting any alleged injuries suffered by the Plaintiff as a result of the subject incident, including a photograph of the Plaintiff taken within six (6) months preceding Plaintiff's alleged injuries. Response: Attached is a photograph depicting Plaintiff’s injuries suffered as a result of the subject incident. A photograph of Plaintiff taken within six months preceding Plaintiff’s injuries has been requested and will be produced upon receipt to the extent same exists. 4 Any and all statements previously made by the Plaintiff herein or Plaintiff's agents. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. FILED: LAKE COUNTY, GARY J. COONEY, CLERK, 10/04/2022 10:24:12 AM Any and all records pertaining to payments made to the Plaintiff arising from the subject incident pursuant to: a. the United States Social Security Act; any federal, state or local disability act; or any other public programs providing medical expenses, disability payments or other similar benefits; any health, sickness or disability income insurance, and any other similar benefits; any contract or agreements of any group, organization, partnership or corporation to provide, pay for, or reimburse costs of hospital, medical or other health care services; any contractual or voluntary wage contribution plan provided by any employers of the Plaintiff or any other system intended to provide wages during any period of alleged disability of such individual. Response: The Zenith’s ledger. True copies of any and all federal income tax returns, W-2 withholding tax statements and any and all business records, paid receipts and other memoranda in the possession, custody or control of the Plaintiff indicating the Plaintiff's gross income, including self- employment, employment, salaries, commissions, bonuses, investments, credits and/or reimbursements for business expenses, for the past seven (7) years together with an in addition to income to date. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. Any and all reports from experts whom you intend to call at the time of trial. Response: Undetermined at this time. However, Plaintiff will comply with the Court’s Trial Order regarding disclosure of experts and materials. Copy of the Curriculum Vitae of any and all experts whom you intend to call at the time of trial. Response: Undetermined at this time. However, Plaintiff will comply with the Court’s Trial Order regarding disclosure of experts and materials. With respect to the alleged injuries at issue in this action, any and all medical records from hospitals or any other health care facility, including all information related to treatments, prognosis, diagnosis, and physical or mental histories made or maintained by the health care professionals identified in response to the interrogatories to Plaintiff. Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 2. 10. All documents which refer or relate to any other lawsuits in which Plaintiff has been a plaintiff in a personal injury matter. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 11. All documents relied upon in compiling your response to the interrogatories and request for production. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of any additional documents responsive to this request. 12 Any and all policies of insurance in force on the date of the incident complained of herein that may provide coverage to Plaintiff for the injuries as alleged by Plaintiff in Plaintiff's Complaint. Response: Arch Insurance Company’s Declarations Page. 13 Any and all documents which purport to support Plaintiffs allegation of negligence against Defendant. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 14 Any and all documents which purport to support wage loss of Plaintiff. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 15 Any and all documents which evidence prior injury, illness or disease to the part of the body to which Plaintiff claims injury in Plaintiffs Complaint. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 16 Any and all documents which evidence prior suits brought by or against Plaintiff. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 17. Plaintiffs complete Personal Injury Protection or No-Fault file for this accident. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 18. A copy of Plaintiff's application for Personal Injury Protection or No-Fault benefits. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 19. Any and all documents which were obtained from, created or generated by Defendant. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 20. Any and all documents which evidence that Plaintiff was injured in this accident. Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 2. 21. All documents from Plaintiffs health insurer indicating payment for medical treatment relating to the injuries Plaintiff claims to have sustained in this accident. Response: The Rawlings Company ledger. 22 All correspondence to and from the police or district attorney relative to this accident. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 23 Copies of pleadings relative to any litigation with Plaintiff's No-Fault insurer. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 24 Copies of all pleadings and answers relative to any and all personal injury protection benefit or claim litigation. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 25 Copies of all applications for No-Fault benefits and/or PIP benefits, copies of all correspondence to and from Plaintiff's PIP insurance carrier, as well as copies of all denials of benefits from Progressive. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 26 Copies of all records obtained by a records request for any reports or documents concerning this alleged incident. Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 2. 27. Copies of all of Plaintiff's Letters of Protection executed by Plaintiff to any healthcare provider listed in Plaintiff's interrogatory responses. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 28 Photocopies of receipts, statements, invoices, checks, canceled checks, explanations of benefits, benefits statements, or other documents or tangible evidence representing expenses of any kind which are claimed to be recoverable in this proceeding, including, but not limited to: expenses from physician examinations, tests, and treatment, therapy, nursing care, hospital and/or institutional care, ambulance services, medications (prescription or otherwise), domestic or household services, services for which you paid money or became liable for payment of money for any and all goods or services which Plaintiff believes were necessitated by the incident complained of in this proceeding. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 29. Copies of all medical reports received by the Plaintiff or Plaintiff's attorneys, investigators, servants, or employees from any physician, hospital, or any practitioner who has rendered treatment to the Plaintiff for injuries incurred as a result of the incident which is the subject of this lawsuit. Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 2. 30. Copies of all hospital records from any hospital where each Plaintiff has been a patient (whether an in-patient or out-patient) subsequent to the incident which is the subject of this lawsuit, which are in the possession of the Plaintiff or Plaintiff's attorneys, investigators, agents, servants, or employees. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 31 Complete copies of income tax returns and all schedules thereto, W-2 forms, and any other documents evidencing income or compensation filed by the Plaintiff with the United States Government or any state for the past five (5) years, and all documents which constitute evidence of income to date for the current year. Response: Plaintiff’s counsel will produce upon receipt, if any. 32. All written statements given by the Plaintiff concerning the subject of this lawsuit. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 33 Color photocopies of all original or duplicate original photographs in the possession of the Plaintiff or Plaintiff's attorneys, investigators, agents, servants, or employees, which are in any manner related to the subject matter of this lawsuit, including, but not limited, to any photographs of the parties, any and all photographs of the vehicles and/or scene of the subject incident, and any photographs upon which the Plaintiff intends to rely or use at trial. Response: Attached are photographs. 34, Any personal journal, diary, log, or other documents evidencing the activities, physical complaints, and dates of examination or treatment of Plaintiff for injuries or damages attributed to the incident in question for the period immediately subsequent to the incident until the date of your response to this request, and color photocopies of any photographs upon which the Plaintiff intends to rely or use at trial. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 35. True and correct photocopies of any insurance policies, declaration pages, applications for benefits which afforded coverage to the Plaintiff for the injuries complained of in this proceeding, including but not limited to, medical, hospitalization, Medicare, Medicaid, disability, medical payments, personal injury protection, and health and accident. Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s request for Production No. 12. 36 Copies of any statutes, rules, regulations, ordinances, and other documents regulatory in nature, upon which the Plaintiff bases Plaintiff's claim for damages in this proceeding. Response: Undetermined at this time. Discovery is ongoing. Plaintiff reserves the right to amend and/or supplement this response as more information becomes available. 37. Copies of all lien letters or other statements asserting or alleging the existence of a lien by any medical or other provider(s) for services received by Plaintiff as a result of the injuries complained of in the Complaint. Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s Response to Request for Production No. 21. 38. Any statements made by Plaintiff, written and recorded. This request includes audio and videotapes of the Plaintiff. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 39. A copy of Plaintiff's passport. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 40. A copy of Plaintiff's driver’s license. Response: Plaintiff’s driver’s license. Al. A copy of the accident report. Response: Florida Traffic Crash Report (#88310181) 42. A copy of Plaintiff's marriage certificate. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 43. Copies of your cellular/mobile telephone bills evidencing incoming and/or outgoing calls for one hour prior to and one hour after the time of the subject motor vehicle accident or if the bill is not in your possession please identify your cell phone number and carrier on the date of loss. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 44, Any and all statement(s) of any witnesses to the subject incident, including the Defendant herein. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 45 For each social networking account listed in response to the interrogatories, provide copies or screenshots of all photographs associated with that account during the two (2) years prior to the date of loss. Response: Plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and seeks information that is neither relevant, nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Courts routinely deny requests that amount to no more than fishing expeditions for discovery of private social media pages where the party fails to make a threshold showing to the relevancy of any information contained on an individual’s private social networking websites, internet usage or email addresses. See, e.g., Salvato v. Miley, No. 5:12-CV-635-Oc-10PRL, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81784, at *6-7 (M.D. Fla. June 11, 2013) (“The mere hope that Brown’s private text-messages, e-mails, and electronic communication might include an admission against interest, without more, is not a sufficient reason to require Brown to provide Plaintiff open access to her private communications with third parties.”); McCann v. Harleysville Ins. Co., 910 N.Y.S.2d 614, 78 A.D.3d 1524 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010) (“Although defendant specified the type of evidence sought, it failed to establish a factual predicate with respect to the relevancy of the evidence. Indeed, defendant essentially sought permission to conduct “a fishing expedition” into plaintiff's Facebook account based on the mere hope of finding relevant evidence.”) (citations omitted); see also Crispin v. Christian Audigier, Inc., 717 F. Supp. 2d 965 (CD. Cal. 2010) (holding that Facebook and MySpace are Electronic Communication Services, and thus subject to the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq.). Further, Plaintiff has a right of privacy in her electronic communications which is protected by the criminal laws of this State. Specifically, the propounder of this discovery is prohibited from using a computer network, including Plaintiff's computer network, to discover the information sought. See O.C.G.A. § 16-9-93(c) which provides: “Any person who uses a computer or computer network with the intention of examining any employment, medical, salary, credit, or any other financial or personal data relating to any other person with knowledge that such examination is without authority shall be guilty of the crime of computer invasion of privacy.” Plaintiff does not grant authority for examination of her stored electronic data. 46 For each social networking account listed in the interrogatories, provide copies or screenshots of all photographs associated with that account from the date of loss to the present. Response: Plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and seeks information that is neither relevant, nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Courts routinely deny requests that amount to no more than fishing expeditions for discovery of private social media pages where the party fails to make a threshold showing to the relevancy of any information contained on an individual’s private social networking websites, internet usage or email addresses. See, e.g., Salvato v. Miley, No. 5:12-CV-635-Oc-10PRL, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81784, at *6-7 (M.D. Fla. June 11, 2013) (“The mere hope that Brown’s private text-messages, e-mails, and electronic communication might include an admission against interest, without more, is not a sufficient reason to require Brown to provide Plaintiff open access to her private communications with third parties.”); McCann vy. Harleysville Ins. Co., 910 N.Y.S.2d 614, 78 A.D.3d 1524 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010) (“Although defendant specified the type of evidence sought, it failed to establish a factual predicate with respect to the relevancy of the evidence. Indeed, defendant essentially sought permission to conduct “a fishing expedition” into plaintiff's Facebook account based on the mere hope of finding relevant evidence.”) (citations omitted); see also Crispin v. Christian Audigier, Inc., 717 F. Supp. 2d 965 (CD. Cal.2010) (holding that Facebook and MySpace are Electronic Communication Services, and thus subject to the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq.). Further, Plaintiff has a right of privacy in her electronic communications which is protected by the criminal laws of this State. Specifically, the propounder of this discovery is prohibited from using a computer network, including Plaintiff's computer network, to discover the information sought. See O.C.G.A. § 16-9-93(c) which provides: “Any person who uses a computer or computer network with the intention of examining any employment, medical, salary, credit, or any other financial or personal data relating to any other person with knowledge that such examination is without authority shall be guilty of the crime of computer invasion of privacy.” Plaintiff does not grant authority for examination of her stored electronic data, 47 Electronic copies of all portions of your profile form social networking sites of which Plaintiff is a member or holds an account, including but not limited to Facebook, Twitter, Myspace, YouTube, LinkedIn, dating websites, etc. (including all updates, changes or modifications to your profile) and all status updates, profile information or other updates, messages, wall comments, causes joined, groups joined, activity streams, photographs, tagged photographs, blog entries, details, blurbs, comments, and applications, from two (2) years prior to the loss through today. To the extent electronic copies are unavailable, please provide the documents in hard copy form. Response: Plaintiff objects to this request on the basis that it is overly broad and seeks information that is neither relevant, nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Courts routinely deny requests that amount to no more than fishing expeditions for discovery of private social media pages where the party fails to make a threshold showing to the relevancy of any information contained on an individual’s private social networking websites, internet usage or email addresses. See, e.g., Salvato v. Miley, No. 5:12-CV-635-Oc-10PRL, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81784, at *6-7 (M.D. Fla. June 11, 2013) (“The mere hope that Brown’s private text-messages, e-mails, and electronic communication might include an admission against interest, without more, is not a sufficient reason to require Brown to provide Plaintiff open access to her private communications with third parties.”); McCann v. Harleysville Ins. Co., 910 N.Y.S.2d 614, 78 A.D.3d 1524 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010) (“Although defendant specified the type of evidence sought, it failed to establish a factual predicate with respect to the relevancy of the evidence. Indeed, defendant essentially sought permission to conduct “a fishing expedition” into plaintiff's Facebook account based on the mere hope of finding relevant evidence.”) (citations omitted); see also Crispin v. Christian Audigier, Inc., 717 F. Supp. 2d 965 (C.D. Cal. 2010) (holding that Facebook and MySpace are Electronic Communication Services, and thus subject to the Stored Communications Act, 18 US.C. § 2701 et seq.). Further, Plaintiff has a right of privacy in her electronic communications which is protected by the criminal laws of this State. Specifically, the propounder of this discovery is prohibited from using a computer network, including Plaintiff's computer network, to discover the information sought. See O.C.G.A. § 16-9-93(c) which provides: “Any person who uses a computer or computer network with the intention of examining any employment, medical, salary, credit, or any other financial or personal data relating to any other person with knowledge that such examination is without authority shall be guilty of the crime of computer invasion of privacy.” Plaintiff does not grant authority for examination of her stored electronic data. 48 A true, complete and accurate copy of the owner’s manual for the vehicle you operated at the time of the accident as alleged in the Complaint. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 49. A true, complete and accurate copy of any recording or other digital documentation of the accident in question. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. 50. A true, complete and accurate copy of any recording or other digital documentation downloaded from any source that in any way relates to the accident in question. This request includes, but is not limited to CAN Bus or similar information, from any body shop, repair shop, dealer or any other person or entity that inspected and/or repaired the vehicle you were operating at the time of the accident in question. Response: Plaintiff is not in possession of documents responsive to this request. Si. Please provide a copy of all notice letters to collateral sources pursuant to Florida Statute 768.76(6), along with the registered or certified mailing number and the signed certified green card or other proof of receipt by the collateral source. Response: Attached is a copy of Plaintiff’s correspondence to Florida Blue. 52. Please provide a copy of all responses to the notice letter(s) sent pursuant to Florida Statute 768.76(6) from the collateral sources. Response: Please refer to Plaintiff’s Response to Request for Production No. 21. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 30" day of September 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court via the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal, which will effect service of the foregoing via electronic mail to all counsel of record. /s/ Devry R. Kelley Devry R. Kelley, Esquire Florida Bar No.: 0567302 Dan Newlin Injury Attorneys 7335 W. Sand Lake Road, Suite 300 Orlando, FL 32819 Direct: (321) 270-0430 Fax: (863) 225-9853 Attorneys for Plaintiff Devry.Kelley@newlinlaw.com Devry.Pleadings@newlinlaw.com Marlene.Zervos@newlinlaw.com