Karen Leaffer and Steven Leaffer v. Gerald v. Zarlengo Cristee Locke Offerdahl and Midtown Obstetrics & Gynecology P.c. (Colorado 2002)

Summary

The court made its original jurisdiction rule absolute and ordered the trial court to compel responses to sixteen non-pattern interrogatories and production of a less-redacted appointment calendar. It held that only discrete subparts count toward a case-management interrogatory limit and adopted a primary-question test for identifying such subparts. It also held that the calendar was discoverable because information about competing obligations could relate to the plaintiffs’ continuity-of-care negligence claim. No separate opinions were filed.

Holding

Exercise of original jurisdiction over the discovery rulings. The court properly exercised its original jurisdiction because the discovery rulings placed the plaintiffs at a significant disadvantage in litigating the malpractice claim, conventional appeal would not provide an adequate remedy, and the interrogatory-counting issue presented a significant question of first impression.

Counting subparts of non-pattern interrogatories. Only discrete subparts of non-pattern interrogatories count toward the interrogatory limit in a Case Management Order; subparts logically or factually subsumed within and necessarily related to the primary question do not count separately. Applying that rule, each of the plaintiffs’ sixteen interrogatories counted as one question because none contained discrete subparts.

Production of Dr. Zarlengo’s appointment calendar. The trial court abused its discretion by denying production of Dr. Zarlengo’s appointment calendar with only patient names other than Karen Leaffer’s redacted.

Karen Leaffer and Steven Leaffer v. Gerald v. Zarlengo Cristee Locke Offerdahl and Midtown Obstetrics & Gynecology P.c.

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities

Cited by