274 F.R.D. 12
D.D.C.2011Background
- Plaintiff Samuel St. John sues DHS for Title VII and ADEA discrimination and retaliation, seeking damages for emotional distress and related injuries.
- Defendant seeks production of plaintiff’s medical records from 2002 to present, including mental health records, to support damages and defenses.
- Plaintiff contends he has not sought mental health treatment and has not waived any psychotherapist-patient privilege; he also refuses HIPAA releases.
- Court previously directed briefings on discovery disputes and narrowed the requested time frame in the balancing of privacy and relevance concerns.
- Court concludes the relevant time period for records is two years before the first alleged discrimination through the present, and permits non-privileged records with connection to claims, while preserving privilege.
- Court directs a categorical psychotherapist-patient privilege log and redaction of sealed submissions for public filing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waiver of psychotherapist-patient privilege by emotional distress claim | St. John did not waive the privilege by alleging distress | Distress claim places mental state at issue, waiving privilege | No waiver; garden-variety distress does not waive privilege |
| Scope and relevance of medical records | Records are largely irrelevant if no treatment occurred | Some records may reveal alternate causes of distress and are relevant | Relevant period limited to two years prior to first discrimination; records must have logical connection to injuries |
| Protection and scope of non-privileged medical records | Privileged status should shield records entirely | Non-privileged records may be discoverable if linked to claims | Non-privileged records within the Relevant Time Period with connection to claims may be produced |
| Log and handling of privilege claims | Privilege logs are unnecessary or overly burdensome | A log is required to assess privilege claims | A categorical privilege log is sufficient; include key details about the mental health professionals and communications |
| Sealing and redaction of sealed submissions | Sealed submissions should remain sealed to protect privacy | Sealings should be limited; public record is preferred with redactions | Redact sensitive material and refile sealed letters for public filing |
Key Cases Cited
- Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1996) (recognizes psychotherapist-patient privilege)
- Koch v. Cox, 489 F.3d 384 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (limits broad waiver; frames garden-variety distress approach)
- Sims v. Blot, 534 F.3d 117 (2d Cir. 2008) (rejects automatic waiver for garden-variety distress)
- Turner v. Imperial Stores, 161 F.R.D. 89 (S.D. Cal. 1995) (identifies factors indicating mental state controversy)
- In re Imperial Corp. of America, 174 F.R.D. 475 (S.D. Cal. 1997) (permits categorical privilege log in discovery orders)
- In re Sealed Case (Medical Records), 381 F.3d 1205 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (discusses balancing privacy interests in medical records discovery)