GREGORY ERN
v.
JANICE LOU SPRINGER AND PROGRESSIVE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY

Fla. 4th DCA | 2021-03-24
No. 20-2107
Mayle
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2021)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

Mental health records may only be produced after in camera inspection by the trial court to confirm that the records are relevant and timely to the claim at issue.


Headnotes

[1] Mental health records sought in discovery may only be disclosed after the trial court conducts an in camera inspection to determine that each document is relevant and tim…

Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“No documents may be disclosed to Husband or his counsel until after the trial court makes the required in-camera inspection to determine that every document disclosed is relevant, timely to the issue of Wife's then-present fitness as a parent, and either not privileged or within a valid waiver of Wife's privilege.”

Court citing Zarzaur v. Zarzaur for the required procedure for disclosing sensitive documents

Facts & Procedural History

Gregory Ern, plaintiff in an automobile negligence action, sought certiorari review of a circuit court order requiring production of his mental health…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

Kansas R. Gooden of Boyd & Jenerette P.A., Miami, and Kevin D. Franz of Boyd & Jenerette P.A., Boca Raton, for respondent Janice Lou Springer. CONNER, J.

Petitioner, plaintiff below in an automobile negligence action, seeks certiorari review of an order requiring production of his mental health records. We grant the petition and quash the order.

The order permitted the production of the records without limitation or in camera inspection to ensure that only relevant information is disclosed connecting the mental health records either in substance or time to the claim at issue. This departs from the essential requirements of law. See Laforest v. Laforest, 284 So. 3d 1099, 1099-1100 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019) (citing Zarzaur v. Zarzaur, 213 So. 3d 1115, 1120 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)); Brown v. Montanez, 90 So. 3d 982, 988 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); McEnany v. Ryan, 44 So. 3d 245, 247 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). We grant relief without prejudice for the trial court to conduct an in camera inspection to confirm that the records are relevant and timely as to the claim at issue. See Zarzaur, 213 So. 3d at 1120 (“No documents may be disclosed to Husband or his counsel until after the trial court makes the required in-camera

2

inspection to determine that every document disclosed is relevant, timely to the issue of Wife’s then-present fitness as a parent, and either not privileged or within a valid waiver of Wife’s privilege.”); McEnany, 44 So. 3d at 247 .

Petition granted, and order quashed with instructions. MAY and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw