Plaintiff Wesley Patterson claims that he was assaulted by two orderlies when he was committed at CMC. Patterson’s discovery sought contact information of prior CMC patients who interacted with one of the orderlies as well as a patient who allegedly witnessed a prior interaction. Finding these discovery requests relevant, the superior court granted Patterson’s motion to compel.
Horvitz & Levy filed a writ petition with a stay request on CMC’s behalf challenging the superior court’s order compelling disclosure of the patients’ information. We emphasized the importance of privacy to psychiatric care and argued that the superior court erred by considering only the general relevance of the demanded discovery. Instead, the court should have balanced the plaintiff’s need for the discovery against the constitutional privacy interests of psychiatric patients. The Court of Appeal agreed. It first issued a stay and, after further briefing, issued an alternative writ of mandate ordering the superior court to apply the proper tests in the first instance or show cause why it should not be compelled to do so.
View Opinion 
