Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-13-78 MCCREA & MCCREA ATTORNEYS AT LAw NEWVILLE & SHIPPENS8URli PEHNA. [N RE: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ORPHANS COURT DIVISION ESTATE OF ROBERT CLOUSE, AN ALLEGED INCOMPETENT NO. 45 ORPHANS 1978 OBJECTIONS TO PETITIONER'S INTERROGATORIES TO ALLEGED INCOMPETENT Robert Clouse, by his counsel John McCrea III, Esquire, and pursuant to Rule 4005(b), Pa.R.C.P., makes the following ob- jections to petitioner's interrogatories filed in the above- captioned proceedings: Interrogatories No.2, 3 and 4: The information sought in these interrogatories (names and addresses of all physicians, neurologists, sufgeons, or other doctors who have treated, tested or diagnosed the condition of Robert Clouse; the services rendered, the interval over which the services were rendered, the treatment and medications pre- scribed, and the tests and studies ordered and conducted for Robert Clouse; and the names and addresses of all institutions where Robert Clouse has received treatment or been observed concernredg his condition arising out of the incident in March, 1976) is entirely too broad. This information, going back two years, is not reasonably related to the issue of whether or not Robert Clouse is presently incompetent to manage his own affairs. Moreover, this information, has, in the main, been developed by Robert Clouse and his counsel, in anticipation of a civil cause of action arising out of the accident in March 1976 being litigated. The petitioner in this proceeding is not a party to that cause of action and should, therefore, not have access to that information. Also, the information sought can only relate to matter which falls within the physician-patient privilege existing ~--~-' MCCREA & MCCREA ATTORNEYS AT LAW NEWVILLE & SHIPPENSBURG PENNA. between Robert Clouse and the doctors whose names are sought in these interrogatories. This being the case, the information is not available for petitioner for this reason. Finally, the information is sought in bad faith, not for the purposes of preparing for the incompetency hearing, but rather for the purposes of interfering with settlement negotiations between Robert Clouse, or his representatives, and the representatiues of the potential defendants in the hereinbeforementioned civil cause of action. Petitioner is attempting to insert herself into a petition where she can either hold up settlement of that cause of action or obtain a percentage of the settlement proceeds for herself. For all of these reasons, these interrogatories are objectionable. (J \Ci7~ tl\,{Y! (.A \ ~'i I {~iA