Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-5_04-cv-00047/USCOURTS-ared-5_04-cv-00047-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits

---

-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

PINE BLUFF DIVISION

JOE D. RATLIFF PLAINTIFF

vs. CASE NO. 5:04CV00047GH

GUARANTEE LIFE INSURANCE

COMPANY DEFENDANT

ORDER

Pending before the Court is plaintiff’s motion to compel. The Court previously

directed the parties to attempt to work out a solution by which plaintiff can obtain

general information regarding defendant’s handling of other claims, but which

protects the privacy of the individuals. The Court directed the parties to submit their

respective proposals to the Court within twenty days of the November4, 2004 Order

if they could not resolve their differences. 

The parties continue to have a dispute over discovery, and 11 months after the

November 4th order, plaintiff has filed a motion to compel. 

Defendant produced a chart summarizing long term disability claims filed by

other employees of BKD, LLP (“BKD”), the accounting firm where plaintiff was a

former partner. Defendant later produced an updated chart. Plaintiff was not

satisfied with this information, and requested the claim file and medical records of a

specific disability claimant. Defendant objected, stating that it could not release

medical information without the individual’s consent and that the information is

irrelevant to plaintiff’s claim. 

The Court finds that plaintiff is not entitled to the specific claim file and

accompanying medical records of the other claimant. The other claimant expressly

Case 5:04-cv-00047-GH Document 23 Filed 12/02/05 Page 1 of 2
-2-

denied defendant permission to release her claim file or medical records to plaintiff.

Indeed, she has filed a motion to intervene to protect her right arguing that her

records are protected under HIPAA, 45 C. F. R. § 164.102. Producing that information

would possibly violate the privacy provisions of various state and federal laws,

including Nebraska Revised Status § 8-1401 (“Disclosure of Confidential Information”)

and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, 15 U.S.C. § 6801 et seq. 

The Court finds that defendant has produced sufficient information The Court

previously noted that discovery is limited in ERISA cases, and that plaintiff was

entitled to only general information. Redacting identifying information as plaintiff

suggests would not address the privacy concerns of the individual as plaintiff would

still be privy to very personal medical information regarding an individual whom he

has identified. 

Accordingly, the motion to compel is denied. As the Court has denied plaintiff

access to the specific information, the motion for limited intervention is denied as

moot. 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of December, 2005 .

___________________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:04-cv-00047-GH Document 23 Filed 12/02/05 Page 2 of 2