Opinion
22-CV-9712 (RA) (BCM)
07-25-2024
PRIYA HARRIRAM, Plaintiff, v. CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
BARBARA MOSES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Pro se plaintiff Priya Harriram has advised the Court that she "will not be signing the release of my Medical Records and my Employment records to the Defendant's Attorney." (Dkt. 52 at ECF p. 2.) Ordinarily, plaintiffs with claims like Ms. Harriram's are required to permit discovery into their relevant employment and medical records. See, e.g., Doherty v. Bice, 2021 WL 5630816, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 1, 2021) (requiring plaintiff who claimed that Purchase College no-contact order caused him "severe stress, anxiety, and depression" to execute release for relevant mental health records); Bowen v. FedEx Corp., 2007 WL 646293, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2007) ("In any lawsuit where the plaintiff is alleging physical and emotional injuries, it is standard procedure for the judge to direct the plaintiff to sign a HIPPA-compliant [sic] authorization for the release of his complete medical, pharmacy, psychiatric or psychological treatment or counseling records.") (internal quotation marks omitted); Howard v. United States, 2010 WL 11688273 (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 28, 2010) (requiring plaintiff seeking damages for personal injuries and lost wages to execute releases for his employment, medical, and government records).
In light of the September 30, 2024, fact discovery deadline (see Dkt. 44 ¶ 4), the parties are hereby directed to meet and confer promptly in a good faith effort to resolve their dispute regarding the releases requested by defendants (as well as any other pending disputes concerning written fact discovery). Thereafter, but no later than August 9, 2024, any aggrieved party may bring a motion to compel or for a protective order with respect to any such unresolved dispute.
SO ORDERED.