According to a summary of the Opinion, in this motor vehicle personal injury matter, the Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant was operating his vehicle in an negligent manner when he crossed the center line and struck the Plaintiff’s vehicle. The Plaintiff also made a claim for punitive damages on the basis that the Defendant was allegedly driving drunk at the time of the accident.
The Plaintiff requested a signed authorization to secure the Defendant’s cell phone records for the date of the accident. The Plaintiff argued that the cell phone records were necessary to track the Defendant’s whereabouts that day in conjunction with allegedly being intoxicated, as well as to obtain information regarding people he may have spoken to on the day of the accident who may have relevant information.
The defense argued that the cell phone information would only be relevant to show whether or not the Defendant was talking on the phone at the time of the accident. Accordingly, the Defendant contended that only the records for the day of the accident, with the times of the calls showing, but all of the phone numbers being redacted, was relevant and discoverable.
Judge David Williamson |
As such, the court granted the Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel the execution of the authorization for the release of the cell phone records. Judge Williamson further ordered that neither the Plaintiff nor his counsel could release the records to anyone else other than the Defendant or Defendant’s counsel. The court also ordered that the Plaintiff only utilize the cell phone information in the course of the subject litigation.
Anyone desiring a copy of this decision may contact the Instant Case Service of the Pennsylvania Law Weekly by calling 1-800-276-7427 and providing the PICS Case No. noted above and pay a small fee.
Source: "Digest of Recent Opinions" Pennsylvania Law Weekly (July 28, 2015).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.