Dobbins v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 19-10546. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20190621b53
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jun. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 19, 2019
Summary: ORDER R. STEVEN WHALEN , Magistrate Judge . On May 15, 2018, Defendant filed a motion for qualified protective order [Doc. #8], relating to the disclosure of Plaintiff Trivly Dobbins' personal health information that is otherwise protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPPA"), 42 U.S.C. 1320d et seq., and Defendant's request to interview Plaintiff's health providers. Plaintiff has not responded to the motion. 1 Having reviewed the motion and brief in
Summary: ORDER R. STEVEN WHALEN , Magistrate Judge . On May 15, 2018, Defendant filed a motion for qualified protective order [Doc. #8], relating to the disclosure of Plaintiff Trivly Dobbins' personal health information that is otherwise protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPPA"), 42 U.S.C. 1320d et seq., and Defendant's request to interview Plaintiff's health providers. Plaintiff has not responded to the motion. 1 Having reviewed the motion and brief in ..
More
ORDER
R. STEVEN WHALEN, Magistrate Judge.
On May 15, 2018, Defendant filed a motion for qualified protective order [Doc. #8], relating to the disclosure of Plaintiff Trivly Dobbins' personal health information that is otherwise protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPPA"), 42 U.S.C. § 1320d et seq., and Defendant's request to interview Plaintiff's health providers. Plaintiff has not responded to the motion.1
Having reviewed the motion and brief in support, and in view of Holman v. Rasak, 486 Mich. 429, 785 N.W.2d 98 (2010), and Szpak v. Inyang, 290 Mich.App. 711 (2010),
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's motion for qualified protective order [Doc. #8] is GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the proposed qualified protective order submitted with Defendant's motion as Exhibit C will be entered as the order of this Court.
FootNotes
1. Defendant's counsel indicates that Plaintiff's counsel would not stipulate to the proposed protective order, but stated, "I would not object to the relief requested and would leave the matter to the Court's discretion." Motion, ¶ 10.
Source: Leagle
