Plaintiff’s Conditions for Defense Medical Examination

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND

ANNA MARIE MURPHY
– Plaintiff,

v

DOUGLAS CHEN, et al.,
– Defendants.

CASE NO.: C-2003-87853 MT

Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Compel a Medical Exam

Plaintiff, ANNA MARIE BOYCE, by and through her attorneys, Ronald V. Miller, Jr., and Miller & Zois, LLC, hereby requests that Defendant’s Douglas Chervenak’s Motion to Compel A Medical Exam be denied and in support thereof states as follows:

1. 1. I. FACTS
      1. On January 14, 2012, Defense counsel sent correspondence unilaterally scheduling a DME for February 9, 2012 without notifying counsel with three weeks’ notice. See Defense Exhibit “A.”
      2. Plaintiff’s counsel objected on February 3, 2012 (via facsimile on February 5, 2012) on the basis that Dr. Kennison is outside the subpoena power of this jurisdiction. See Defense Exhibit “B.”
      3. In a good faith effort to resolve this discovery dispute without Court intervention, Plaintiff’s counsel asked Defendant’s counsel if Dr. Kennison would be willing to comply with requests for his financial information and other documents that would have otherwise been requested by way of subpoena duces tecum. See Plaintiff’s Exhibit “C.”
      4. Defendant’s counsel responded via facsimile on February 20, 2012 that she called Dr. Kennison but that he had yet to return her call. See Plaintiff’s Exhibit “D.”
      5. Ten days later, Defendant’s counsel apparently still has not heard back from Dr. Kennison to date.
   2. II. ARGUMENT As a physician practicing in Washington, D.C., Dr. Bruce Kennison is outside of this Court’s subpoena power. While Dr. Kennison resides in Maryland, he apparently is quite proficient at evading service. See Affidavit of Shawn M. Cole (Exhibit “E”), Affidavit of Antonio Pennacchia (Exhibit “F”), and Affidavit of Richard Ruth (Exhibit “G”). These affidavits demonstrate that Dr. Kennison is effective at evading service at his home and uses the fact that his office is in Washington as a shield against proper service of a Maryland subpoena.Defendant’s request for relief rests on his claim that he was notified late regarding Plaintiff’s refusal to appear for an Dependent Medical Exam in Washington D.C. Because a DME was never ordered as required by the Court pursuant Maryland Rule 2-423, and because subjecting Plaintiff to an DME in Washington, D.C., is beyond the subpoena powers over a doctor who has historically been unwilling to comply voluntarily, Defendant’s motion fails.

      There is a reason why we continue to see Dr. Kennison listed as a defense expert time and time again. There are numerous qualified doctors right here in Anne Arundel County, and thousands across the state of Maryland that the Defense could have selected to perform the DME of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff should not be denied the opportunity to vigorously cross-examine Dr. Kennison on his earnings as a professional witness and should be armed with fee documents to use against him as to “bias.”

      WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to deny Defendant’s Motion to Compel A Medical Exam.

Miller & Zois, LLC
Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Laura G. Zois
1 South St, #2450
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410)779-4600
(410)760-8922 (Fax)
Attorneys for the Plaintiff

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Compel A Medical Exam sent via U.S. Mail, first-class, postage prepaid, this 1^st day of March, 2012, to:

Robin Finizio Kessler, Esq.
The Annapolis Exchange
1997 Annapolis Exchange Parkway
Suite 400
Annapolis, Maryland 21401
Attorney for the Defendants

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND

ANNA MARIE MURPHY
– Plaintiff,

v

DOUGLAS CHERVENAK, et al.,
– Defendants.

CASE NO: C-2003-87853 MT

ORDER

Upon consideration of the Defendant’s Motion to Compel A Medical Exam, it is this _________ day of _________________________, 2005, by the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Maryland, hereby ORDERED, that the Defendant’s Motion is DENIED.

JUDGE

COPIES TO:
Ronald V. Miller, Jr., Esq.
Miller & Zois, LLC
1 South St, #2450
Baltimore, MD 21202

Robin Finizio Kessler, Esq.
The Annapolis Exchange
1997 Annapolis Exchange Parkway
Suite 400
Annapolis, Maryland 21401

1. • Hornage v. Falik (new 2010 Maryland high court opinion argued by our lawyers that sets forth the standard for what is discoverable)
   • More Information on Independent Medical Exams (overview and links)
   • Cross-Examining an IME Doctor (advice on questions you can ask an independent medical exam doctor and score points)
   • Can an IME Doctor Commit Malpractice on a Patient?
   • Anatomy of a Maryland Personal Injury Lawsuit (the lawsuit step-by step)
   • Videotaping Independent Medical Exams #1 (analysis of strategy of videotaping an IME)
   • Videotaping Independent Medical Exams # 2 (more analysis and recent OK ruling)
   • Sample Independent Medical Exam (example report from an IME in a truck accident case)
   • Accident and Malpractice Attorney Help Center (help center for personal injury accident and malpractice lawyers)
   • Personal Injury Lawyer Blog (analysis of personal injury issues facing lawyers)
   • Maryland Medical Malpractice (overview on malpractice in Maryland)
   • Explanation of Maryland Car Accident Law (summary of Maryland accident law)