Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Clay v. Woodbury County

United States District Court, N.D. Iowa

July 17, 2013

NICOLE A. CLAY, Plaintiff,
v.
WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA, et al., Defendants

Page 1056

For Nicole A Clay, Plaintiff: David A O'Brien, LEAD ATTORNEY, Willey, O'Brien, LC, Cedar Rapids, IA.

For Woodbury County, Iowa, Glenn J Parrett, individually and as Sheriff of Woodbury County, Iowa, Amy Strim, individually and as Deputy Sheriff/Jailer of Woodbury County, Iowa, Brigid Delaney, individually and as Deputy Sheriff/Jailer of Woodbury County, Iowa, Jorma Schwedler, individually and as Deputy Sheriff/Jailer of Woodbury County, Iowa, Dustin DeGroot, individually and as Deputy Sheriff/Jailer of Woodbury County, Iowa, Defendants: Timothy C Boller, LEAD ATTORNEY, Thomas C Verhulst, Gallagher, Langlas & Gallagher, PC, Waterloo, IA.

For Sioux City Iowa, The City of, Brad Echter, Individually and as Police Officer for the City of Sioux City, Defendants: Connie E Anstey, LEAD ATTORNEY, City Attorney's Office, Sioux City, IA.

OPINION

Page 1057

ORDER

LEONARD T. STRAND, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

Plaintiff has filed a motion (Doc. No. 48) to quash subpoena and discovery deposition of her treating psychiatrist. The motion addresses a subpoena and deposition notice issued with regard to Albert Okine, PA-C, by defendants Woodbury County, Iowa, Glenn J. Parrett, Amy Strim, Brigid Delaney, Jorma Schwedler and Dustin DeGroot (the " County defendants" ). Plaintiff contends that the physician-patient privilege, as recognized and applied under Iowa law, prohibits the County defendants from compelling testimony from Okine. The County defendants have filed a resistance (Doc. No. 51). The motion is fully submitted.

Factual Background

Plaintiff Nicole A. Clay filed this case on April 27, 2012. In her third Amended Complaint, she states that on August 12, 2011, she was arrested for public intoxication, a simple misdemeanor. She alleges that after she was taken to the Woodbury County jail, the defendant correctional officers engaged in an unreasonable strip search in violation of the Fourth Amendment and violated her First Amendment rights by engaging in this activity in retaliation for her verbal objections to their conduct. Clay also alleges that some of the defendants conducted an unreasonable search of her purse in violation of the Fourth Amendment. In addition, she alleges that Woodbury County and Parrett established a policy, regulation, official decision, custom or usage with reckless or deliberate indifference to her rights. She demands a jury trial.

In Clay's initial discovery disclosures, she supplied her records of therapy with Albert Okine, PA-C, as well as billing statements from Okine's clinic, Dean & Associates. She also supplied a signed Patient's Release of Information allowing the defendants to obtain her medical records from Dean & Associates.

In her answer to Interrogatory No. 16, Clay stated that her damages include past pain and suffering and past loss of mind/body function. In answering Interrogatory No. 15, she identified Okine as being one of " Plaintiff's medical providers relating to the assault." She described him as a psychiatric physician's assistant who provided psychiatric treatment and care to Clay prior to and following the incident, and who continues to treat her. Clay also designated Okine in her expert witness disclosures, stating that he would testify regarding her injuries, including alleged ongoing emotional injuries and how her pre-existing mental and emotional injuries were aggravated by the jail incident.

Clay's Third Amended Complaint, filed January 2, 2013, alleges that she was " traumatized" by the defendants' allegedly-unlawful conduct. See Doc. No. 37 ¶ 23. She further alleges that she suffered damages because she was subjected to searches that were " demeaning, dehumanizing, undignified, humiliating, terrifying, unpleasant, embarrassing, repulsive, and signified degradation and submission." Id. ¶ 28. She contends that she has been damaged because of the defendants' conduct, " as set out in this Complaint." See, e.g., id. ¶ 58.

During Clay's deposition in April 2013, she testified that some of her treatment at Dean & Associates was related to the jail incident. She further testified that her anxiety had increased as a result of the incident and the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.