The defendant insurer brought a motion to compel a non-party insurer to produce exhibits and surveillance from a related FSCO arbitration, and to compel the plaintiff to attend a further examination for discovery.
The plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing that production would violate his privacy rights and international law.
The court granted the motion, finding that the documents were relevant to the plaintiff's claim of catastrophic impairment and that the Privacy Act did not apply to private companies.
The court also ordered further discovery due to an important change in facts regarding the plaintiff's medical condition.
