Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
Medical malpractice and wrongful death litigation often involves deeply personal evidence, particularly when a surviving family member seeks accountability for the loss of a loved one. As social media becomes an increasingly common outlet for grief and emotional support, courts are frequently asked to determine how far discovery may reach into a plaintiff’s private online communications. A recent opinion issued by a New York court addresses whether posts made in a bereavement support group on social media are subject to disclosure in a malpractice and wrongful death action. If you are interested in pursuing malpractice claims, you should consider speaking with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to understand how discovery rules may affect your case.
Factual and Procedural Setting
It is reported that the plaintiff commenced an action individually and as executor of the decedent’s estate seeking damages for medical malpractice and wrongful death arising from the decedent’s medical treatment and subsequent death. The defendants included physicians and hospital entities that provided care to the decedent prior to his passing.
Allegedly, during the course of discovery, the defendants sought to continue the plaintiff’s deposition and requested the production of certain messages the plaintiff had posted in a bereavement support group on a social media platform. The defendants asserted that these posts were relevant to issues of damages, including the plaintiff’s emotional condition and loss claims.
Reportedly, the plaintiff moved for a protective order seeking to prevent any further deposition testimony and to preclude disclosure of the requested social media content. The plaintiff argued that the posts were private and sensitive, and not material to the claims or defenses in the action.
It is alleged that the trial court denied the motion for a protective order, finding that the discovery sought was appropriately limited and relevant. The plaintiff thereafter filed a motion styled as one for leave to renew and reargue, again seeking to block the continued deposition and the production of the bereavement group posts.
Reportedly, the trial court denied the subsequent motion as well. The plaintiff appealed from both the original order denying the protective order and the later order denying reargument, challenging the scope of permissible discovery and the trial court’s exercise of discretion.
Discovery of Social Media Posts in Medical Malpractice Cases
On appeal, the court first addressed the threshold issue of appealability. The court explained that orders resolving objections made during an examination before trial, including orders denying protective relief against continued deposition, are not appealable as of right. Because the plaintiff had already been denied leave to appeal that portion of the order, the court dismissed that aspect of the appeal.
Turning to the remaining issues, the court reviewed the discovery rulings under the familiar standard governing disclosure in civil actions. The court reiterated that CPLR 3101(a) mandates full disclosure of all matter material and necessary to the prosecution or defense of an action. These terms are interpreted liberally, and the test is whether the information sought is useful and reasonable in assisting trial preparation.
The court emphasized that discovery determinations are entrusted to the sound discretion of the trial court. Absent an error of law or an improvident exercise of discretion, an appellate court will not disturb those determinations. Applying that standard, the court concluded that the trial court acted within its discretion in denying the protective order related to the social media content.
The court found that the defendants’ discovery request was narrowly tailored. It sought only the plaintiff’s own posts made within a bereavement support group, rather than communications of other group members or unrelated social media activity. Because the plaintiff placed her emotional suffering at issue through claims for damages, the court determined that the requested content bore on relevant issues and was therefore discoverable.
The court also addressed the plaintiff’s later motion for leave to renew and reargue. Because the motion was not based on new facts or law, it was treated as a motion for reargument only. The denial of such a motion is not appealable, requiring dismissal of the appeal from the later order.
Ultimately, the court affirmed the trial court’s discovery ruling insofar as it was reviewable and dismissed the remaining portions of the appeal.
Consult with a Skilled Syracuse Medical Malpractice Attorney
Medical malpractice and wrongful death cases can involve extensive discovery that reaches into sensitive areas of a family’s life. The experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers guide clients through every stage of litigation, including complex discovery disputes involving social media and privacy concerns. We represent clients throughout Syracuse, Rochester, and across New York State. If you have questions about a malpractice or wrongful death claim, contact the firm at 833-200-2000 or visit us online to schedule a free and confidential consultation.
