For my divorce trial that took place in Florida, opposing counsel had hired an Independant Medical Examiner to refute my diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis by my own Neurologist. They wrote a letter to their IME that contained false information regarding my health issues and made outrageous claims that I had told my ex-husband that I had two heart attacks and was terminally ill, which was the card that they played in order to persuade the court that I had defrauded my ex-husband. Furthermore, they did not provide their IME with the over 300 pages of medical records that I had previously given to them. The only medical records that the IME received was opposing counsel's letter stating specific medical findings and conditions, some true and some false, as I found out at trial. At trial, after their IME stated that 'it was probable that I had MS, but not definite', they pulled out the 300+ pages of medical records that I had provided to them and asked their IME if he had seen those documents. He looked at them, and said that he had not seen them, and if he had, he wouldn't have said that it was probable that I had MS, but instead would've had to evaluate me differently. Therefore, it appears that opposing counsel intentionally withheld those medical records, and only told their IME what they wanted him to know prior to the IME. Also, as I mentioned before, I believe there was false information contained in that letter that they wrote to their IME regarding me. As a result, the judge ruled against me, believed that I had defrauded my ex-husband regarding my health issues, and believed opposing counsel when their IME said that he would not have made the diagnosis of 'possible MS ' if he had actually seen all of those records, and would've thought that high cholesterol was causing my neurological problems (ranging from 160-240 in my labs). And, they intentionally did not submit those 300+ pages of medical records into evidence, (and my own attorney refused to for some unknown reason, which contributed to tanking my case) . It greatly affected my case, as the judge ruled against me on just about every request that I made, including denying me an IDO so that I could receive the monthly alimony payments directly from my ex-husband's employment, who, by the way, makes over $500,000 a year and has equity in two internet companies (both of which the judge also denied me any percentage of, because he re-named the first one, and awarded me about $20,000 of the second one, even though I requested to receive half of his percentage equity because the company was planning on being sold, and true value could not be determined until it sold). I have two questions: Is there any motion that I can file with regard to the false medical information given to their IME, as well as their deliberate withholding of pertinant medical records that I had previously provided? And second, I went to the IME's office to obtain my medical record chart that he established, as permitted through the HIPAA laws. The only thing in my chart was his evaluation/final report after the one-time exam, and a copy of that letter from opposing counsel stating why they wanted him to do the IME, as well as listing information regarding my brain MRI's, spinal tap results, and other information with regard to my MS diagnosis that my own Neurolgist had provided. This was only in letter form, and there were no back-up documents provided to their IME. As I stated before, I believe that they also gave their IME false medical information in that letter, but need a copy of it to get specifics. Am I permitted to receive a copy of that letter since it was part of my medical record/chart? The IME's office told me that I could not, but since HIPAA law allows me to get all information contained in my medical record, I was wondering if that would include their letter, especially since it specifically states my medical history. Thanks for your help.
Category: Discovery |
State: Florida |
Attorney work product is defined as any writing that reflects an attorney’s impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal research or theories and trial preparation material. This information is ordinarily privileged (and, therefore, not discoverable) unless there has been a waiver of the protection. 'The attorney-client privilege authorizes a client to refuse to disclose, and to prevent others from disclosing, information communicated in confidence to the attorney and legal advice received in return.
It will be a matter of determination for the court whether the materials sought are privileged work product or privileged client communications. The key distinction between attorney–client privilege and attorney work product involves whether the document in question contains information obtained from the client. The reason for making this distinction is that information protected by the attorney–client privilege is usually never available to discovery. Attorney work product is available, however, if the opposing party can show that justice would be denied if the work product was unavailable.
Please see the information at the following link for further discussion: