Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 23:35:16 -0400 Subject: My responses to UNUM Interrogatories Judy Morris, MD 261 Bumstead Rd. Monson, MA 01057 (413) 267-3606 Katherine A. Robertson Patricia A. Peard Buckley, Richardson and Gelinas, LLP 1500 Main Street, Suite 2700 PO Box 15507 Springfield, MA 01115-5507 July 20, 1999 Dear Ms. Robertson and Ms. Peard,
I apologize for the lateness of my response to your interrogatories and document production requests. I have been experiencing a severe relapse of my CFS, as documented by the enclosed calendar.
As far as your answers to my interrogatories and requests, I have neither the time nor the energy to engage in futile attempts to confer with you and other UNUM representatives to get you to produce documents or answer questions you obviously have no intention of producing or answering in good faith. As soon as I have time and energy I will be filing motions to compel and requesting the court issue both monetary and issue sanctions for your abuses of the discovery process.
Based on my extensive research, knowledge and belief, I feel that most of the items I have requested are clearly disclosable, relevant and the interest of justice clearly overrides the defenses of work product doctrine, attorney-client privilege and vagueness, even if they did exist, that you have asserted in an attempt not to disclose these documents.
Sincerely,
Judy Morris, MD
UNITED STATE FEDERAL COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS JUDY E. MORRIS, MD ) ) Plaintiff ) Civil Action No. CA 98-30204 FHF ) v. ) ) UNUM CORPORATION OF AMERICA, ) et al. ) Defendants ANSWERS OF THE PLAINTIFF, JUDY E. MORRIS, M.D. TO THE DEFENDANT'S INTERROGATORIESNote: I am answering these questions to the best of my ability and recollection to submit by deadline of July 10, 1999. I reserve the right to supplement these answers if I find that I have forgotten something. I make no guarantees to the completeness of these answers, especially considering the extensive and burdensome nature of many of them and the questionable relevance of the information they are requesting. Furthermore, I am still suffering from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and submit 2 pages from my most recent Calendar regarding the exacerbation of some of the symptoms that I have been having in the last month.(Attachment 0)
Interrogatory No. 1
Identify the person or persons answering these interrogatories as well as all persons with whom the person(s) preparing the answers to these interrogatories consulted in the preparation of such answers and specify with respect to each such person the numbers of the interrogatories about which that individual was consulted.
Answer No. 1
All interrogatories were answered by myself, the plaintiff, Dr. Judy Morris. I did not consult with anyone when answering these interrogatories.
Interrogatory No. 2
With respect to the illness for which you claim LTD benefits, please provide the following information for each psychologist, psychiatrist, physician or any other health care professional with whom you have consulted or treated for diagnosis, therapy, treatment, x-rays, or tests since April 11, 1997:
a. The name, address and specialty of each; b. The date of each visit or contact; c. The condition for which each visit or contact was made; d. The types of procedures performed and the results of each procedure; and e. Each and every diagnosis, if any, resulting from each such visit or contact that the date of such diagnosis.
Answer No. 2
Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory as that information has already been provided to UNUM on an ongoing basis on numerous occasions. Furthermore, from January 1997 until November 1, 1998, UNUM had a consent form that enabled them to request this information any time they wished. They chose not to avail themselves of this. To the extent that think this information is now relevant implies, prima facie, and inadequate and Bad Faith investigation of my claims prior to their initial denials. Without waiving this objection and without reproducing again information that has already been provided, repeatedly, plaintiff states:
1. Patricia McIlvaine, MD - Internal Medicine Monson Medical Center 2 Main Street Monson, MA 01057 April 18, 1997 - Follow-up for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Diagnosis - Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 2. Richard Glew, MD - Infectious Diseases 119 Belmont St. Worcester, MA 01605 April 29, 1997 - Consultation, Second Opinion Lab tests for ANA screen, ESR, Ferritin, Hep. C - Results normal or negative for these. Diagnosis - Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 3. Ken Director, MD - Psychiatrist 2525 20th Street Vero Beach, FL 32960 May 30, 1997 - Condition for which contact was made - Rule out psychiatric illness, Second Opinion Psychiatric exam and MMPI-2 Diagnosis - No major psychiatric syndrome, mild depression and paranoia consistent with her physical illness and difficulties with her insurance company 4. Pamela Kebrdle, Ph.D. - Psychologist 3475 Sheridan St., Suite 310 Hollywood, FL 33021 Follow-up counseling for situational depression on May 6, 13, 20, 27, 1997. (I'm not sure if there were any sessions between April 11 and May 6th as they are not showing in my calendar.) 5. Nancy Klimas, MD - Immunologist U of Miami Medical School 1500 NW 12th Avenue Suite 1201 Miami, FL 33136 June 5 and 19, 1997 - Consultation, Third Opinion Testing Done - Natural Killer Cell Activity, Extended Immunodeficiency Panel, VCA IgG Elisa, Blastogenesis 1 Conc. Results: "Marked T-cell activation," "Abnormal CD4 subsets," Activity of NK Cells below normal limits, markedly elevated VCA IgG Elisa, Increased numbers of CD26 and CD38 Cells, Increased lymphocyte response to pokeweed Diagnosis: "1)Complete consistent with CFS, clinically, historically, immunologically" "2)Sleep disorder" 6. Dr. Richard Glew August 21, 1997 - Follow-up for CFS Diagnosis - Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 7. Dr. Patricia McIlvaine October 6, 1997 - Follow-up for CFS High Blood Pressure Diagnosis: Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 8. I burned my hand severely approximately November 11, 1997 in a cooking accident. I saw Dr. McIlvaine the next morning and on November 14 (or maybe 17) I saw Dr. Caetano Rodamilans, a surgeon, for burn consultation and treatment. I had daily whirlpool treatments for a week or two. I do not have these records available. 9. Dr. Richard Glew January 26, 1998 - Follow-up for CFS Diagnosis - Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, High Blood Pressure related to stress 10. Dr. Patricia McIlvaine February 5, 1998 - Follow-up for CFS Diagnosis - Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 11. Dr. Patricia McIlvaine July 1, 1998 - Follow-up for CFS and Blood Pressure Diagnosis - Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 12. Dr. Peter Kelly - Ophthalmologist Palmer, MA Sometime in the Spring of 1998 I went to see Dr. Kelly because I was having "scintillating scotomas" (waving and flashing lights) in my visual field. Diagnosis: Optic Migraines August 27, 1998 - Follow up for Optic Neuritis and Optic Migraines Visual field testing performed - Consistent with amblyopia in Left eye. No apparent residual defect from the optic neuritis in the Right eye. 13. Dr. Patricia McIlvaine December 22, 1998 - Follow-up for CFS and Blood Pressure Diagnosis - Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 14. Dr. Patricia McIlvaine June 10, 1999 - Follow-up for CFS and Blood Pressure Diagnosis - Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, StressInterrogatory No. 3For any and all treatments, admissions, discharges or consultations or visits with any health care provider after April 11, 1997 and which you do not claim are related to your claim for LTD benefits, please provide the information requested in the preceeding interrogatory.
Answer No. 3
Answers to No. 3 are incorporated into answers to No. 2 in chronological order
Interrogatory No. 4
With respect to the illness for which you claim LTD benefits, for each prescription medication you have ever taken related in any way to the treatment of that illness please provide the following:
a. The date(s) on which each was prescribed; b. The date(s) on which each was taken c. The condition or symptom for which each was taken; d. The name and address of each pharmacist or physician from which the medication was purchased or otherwise obtained: e. The name and address of each physician prescribing each such medication.
Answer No. 4
Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is grossly overbroad and burdensome and meant to harass. Furthermore plaintiff objects that, to the extent that this information is relevant to plaintiff's claim for LTD benefits, it was available to UNUM during the claims and appeals periods and was not requested by UNUM. The fact that they are now requesting this information for any purpose is prima facie evidence that their initial claims denials were based on an incomplete evaluation. Without waiving these objections, plaintiff states, to the best of her recollection, she takes the following prescriptions:
1. Prozac 20 mg per day - Originally prescribed by Dr. McIlvaine for depression but recommended by Dr. Nancy Klimas due to the fact that it's serotonin re-uptake inhibition helps the symptoms of CFS - Prescriptions provided by Dr. McIlvaine
2. Fiorinol/Fioricet - One to two pill taken approximately 2-3 times per week for flare-up of symptoms of CFS, specifically headaches and muscle aches not responsive to Tylenol or Aspirin. Also helps somewhat with fatigue at times. Prescriptions provided by Dr. McIlvaine
3. Tylox - One pill approximately 5 or 6 times a month for headaches or muscle pains not responsive to Tylenol, Aspirin or Fiorinol. Prescriptions provided by Dr. McIlvaine
4. Ativan - .5 to 1 mg as needed for anxiety related to stress and CFS. I take this about 2-3 times per month. Prescriptions provided by Dr. McIlvaine.
5. Toprol - for sporadic blood pressure elevations. 25-50 mg. Taken episodically depending on physical symptoms of palpitations and level of blood pressure. Samples provided by Dr. McIlvaine.
6. Dr. Director suggested a trial of Ritalin when I saw him in May 1997. He gave me a prescription for a small amount which I tried as directed. There was no improvement with Ritalin.
As noted in the medical records that had already been provided to UNUM, prior to and during the work-up for CFS I was treated with or had taken other medications including sample medications from time to time for headaches including over-the-counter analgesic/decongestant medication, antihistamines, antibiotics, allergy shots, and Depakote.
Interrogatory No. 5
For any and all medications prescribed for you after October 28, 1996 and which you do not claim are related to your claim for LTD benefits, please provide the information requested in the preceding interrogatory.
Answer No. 5
To the best of my recollection the only other prescription medications taken during this time were antibiotics, burn cream and pain medications when I burned my hand in November 1997 and antibiotics for a recent intestinal infection.
Interrogatory No. 6
Have you ever been advised that you have a congenital illness? If so, for each such illness please provide the following: a. The name of the congenital illness; b. The health care provider who informed you of the illness; c. The date you were so informed; d. The dates and nature of each and every treatment for such congenital illness.
Answer No. 6
I was born with a congenitally abnormal muscle in my left eye. The cosmetic defect was corrected with three surgical procedures and other treatments during my childhood. I have no useful vision in my left eye. My parents informed me of this problem. It would be unduly burdensome and irrelevant to attempt to obtain these records. I have never been told I have any other congenital illness. To the extent that any of this information is relevant to this claim, it should have been obtained by UNUM prior to denial of plaintiff's claims.
Interrogatory No. 7
Have you ever used non-prescribed, other than over-the-counter medications or drugs since January 1, 1990? If so, please provide the following information:
a. The nature of each such drug or medication; b. The dates of use of each such drug or medication.
Answer No. 7
Plaintiff objects to this question in that it is overbroad, unduly burdensome and requests information that has either already been submitted to UNUM or was apparently deemed not relevant by UNUM during their claims processing and denial. To the extent that any of this information is relevant to UNUM denial of my disability claims, it should have been obtained and considered during the claims processing or appeals periods. If UNUM now considers this information relevant it is prima facie evidence that the investigation conducted prior to the denial of my original claims was incomplete and in Bad Faith. This information has been available to UNUM throughout the claims and appeals process and has not been requested. To the extent that it is relevant please see Dr. McIlvaine's medical record dated 4/27/95 when I told Dr. McIlvaine that I had "tried everything" for my headaches. Refer to Interrogatory No. 4.
Interrogatory No. 8
Have you ever prescribed any medications or treatment for yourself since January 1, 1990. If the answer is yes, please provide the following information for each such medication or treatment; a. The date(s) on which each was prescribed; b. The date(s) on which each was taken; c. The condition for which each was taken; d. The name and address of each pharmacist or physician from which the medication was purchased or otherwise obtained.
Answer No. 8
Same objections as Interrogatory No. 7. Plaintiff objects to this question in that it is overbroad, unduly burdensome and requests information that has either already been submitted to UNUM or was apparently deemed not relevant by UNUM during their claims processing and denial. This information has been available to UNUM throughout the claims and appeals process and has not been requested. To the extent that it is relevant please see Dr. McIlvaine's medical record dated 4/27/95 when I told Dr. McIlvaine that I had "tried everything" for my headaches. Refer to Interrogatory No. 4.
Without waiving these objections, the plaintiff states: 1. I never prescribed a controlled substance for myself 2. I did occasionally use sample medications in the form of antibiotics, antihistamines and sinus preparations during the period from 1990 to present in an attempt to relief headaches. 3. I used sample antibiotics to treat an intestinal infection I had in June 1996 as a result of eating unwashed raspberries during an outbreak of Cryptospora in these fruits imported from California. 4. On my recent trip to Florida, I developed a severe intestinal infection for which I wrote myself a prescription for Flagyl, an antibiotic, which cleared it up.
Interrogatory No. 9
List all positions of employment you have held since January 1, 1990 and for each such position state the following: a. The place of employment, including address and telephone number; b. The name of the employer; c. The date employment commenced and the date employment ended, if applicable. d. A full description of the duties of the employment, including hours worked; e. The hourly rate or salary for the position, including any increases or decreases in compensation during the full time employment and the dates on which those increases or decreases became effective; f. The reason(s) you left employment or were terminated from employment; g. The name of your immediate manger or supervisor at the time you left or were terminated from employment.
Answer No. 9
Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad and burdensome. Furthermore plaintiff has previously submitted this information in the form of her Curriculum Vitae or would have submitted this information or UNUM could have obtained this information with their consent form had it been relevant, which it is not. To the extent that UNUM is now requesting this information, it represents Prima Facie evidence that their initial investigation of my claims prior to denial was incomplete and biased and in Bad Faith. Without waiving these objections the plaintiff submits another copy of her Curriculum Vitae.
Interrogatory No. 10
List all volunteer positions you have held since January 1, 1990 and for each such position, state the following a. The name and address of the organization for which you volunteered; b. The date you began volunteering and the date, if applicable, when you stopped your volunteer activity for that entity; c. A complete description of the activities in which you engaged as a volunteer; d. The number of hours each week that you volunteered in the position; e. The reason you stopped your volunteer activity, indicating if the cessation was voluntary or involuntary.
Answer No. 10
The plaintiff objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad, irrelevant, and seeks information not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Notwithstanding and without waiving these objections, plaintiff states as follows:
To the best of my recollection the only volunteer positions I had were prior to 1995. I worked for a few months one morning a week at the local nature sanctuary with rescued animals and stopped when it became incompatible with my work schedule.
I did one day of Fund Raising, on, I believe, July 4, 1994, for the Rainforest Action Network.
I sponsored a slide show for the Whale Conservation Institute. I don't remember what year.
Despite the fact that I had the desire to do volunteer work, including work at the Free Medical Clinic in Southbridge, I was becoming increasingly ill from 1995 onward and did not attempt to undertake any extra duties.
Interrogatory No. 11
List the names of all individuals and their positions of employment who have direct knowledge of the physical and emotional requirements of the position you held at Harrington Hospital as of October, 1996.
Answer No. 11
This is information that clearly should have been obtained by UNUM during their "investigation" of my claim and their attempt to obtain it now is prima facie evidence of an inadequate investigation of my claim prior to denial. This interrogatory also requests information that is beyond the scope of my personal knowledge to the extent that it calls for speculation of what other people might know. Furthermore, before naming such individuals to UNUM, at this point, I would require the following sworn statement that UNUM, nor any person working for or at the direction of UNUM in any way, will:
1) not attempt to contact plaintiff's witnesses, experts or others in person or by telephone
2) will contact such witnesses only in writing and by mail with a copy of any such correspondence also automatically going to plaintiff at that time
3) that plaintiff's witnesses will not be subjected to surveillance, background checks or other unwarranted intrusions into their privacy
4) if UNUM wishes to question or depose plaintiff's witnesses this will be arranged with plaintiff present in person or by telephone and plaintiff will be allowed to tape record all conversations with potential witnesses in her trial, and be sent a true and correct copy of any written document produced by UNUM related to these witnesses and from these encounters as soon as such document is available to UNUM.
Notwithstanding and without waiving these objections, plaintiff states:
In general, I would assume that other Emergency Room Physicians at Harrington Hospital, the Director of the Emergency Department and the nurses that work in the Emergency Department at Harrington Memorial Hospital would have direct knowledge of the physical and emotional requirements of the position I held as a Staff Emergency Department Physician as of October 1996. However to the extent the their observations or opinions are relevant to this disability claim, they certainly should have been obtained during the investigation of plaintiff's claims and prior to the denial of her claims. UNUM interest in this information now is Prima Facie evidence of an incomplete and Bad Faith investigation prior to the original denial of plaintiff's claims.
Interrogatory No. 12
List each and every attempt you have made to find employment since October, 1996 and for each such attempt provide the following information:
a. The name and location of the potential employer; b. The date of the attempt; c. The name of the individual with whom you interviewed; d. The source from which you learned the position was available; e. The exact nature of the position for which you applied including the title of the position, the duties of the position and the salary or hourly rate for the position; f. The reason, if known, that you did obtain the position, or the reason, if applicable, that you declined the position.
Answer No. 12
Plaintiff objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information that is an element of the defendant's burden of proof. Furthermore it seeks information that is not relevant to this litigation inasmuch as plaintiff has not, in fact, sought, or worked, as an Emergency Room Physician since she applied for disability benefits, and the seeking of employment is not a requirement of plaintiff's contract with UNUM. Without waiving these objections, plaintiff also states that getting UNUM to pay the contractual benefits to which she is owed according to the terms of her contracts is a "full-time" job in that it requires excessive amounts of time and energy that leave plaintiff, due to her disability, exhausted and unable to seek any other type of useful or remunerative work. My "full-time" job with UNUM has also interfered with my ability financially and time and energy-wise to seek further diagnostic tests, treatments and abide by the recommendations of my doctors, the CDC and NIH that in order t o improve I need to avoid physical and psychological stress.
Interrogatory No. 13
Have you applied for workers compensation benefits in connection with the disability which is the subject of this lawsuit?
Answer No. 13
No, I have not.
Interrogatory No. 14
Have you applied for social security benefits for you or any family member in connection with the disability which is the subject of this lawsuit?
Answer No. 14
No, I have not.
Interrogatory No. 15
Have you applied for any pension or retirement benefits in connection with the disability which is the subject of this lawsuit?
Answer No. 15
No, I have not.
Interrogatory No. 16
Have you applied for unemployment compensation since the date of the disability which is the subject of this lawsuit?
Answer No. 16
No, I have not.
Interrogatory No. 17
What is the total amount of damages sought by you in this action? Please set forth in complete detail the manner in which you compute the damages sought.
Answer No. 17
In the present action for my disability benefits on my group policy, notwithstanding the ERISA law, I am merely seeking what I have always been seeking - That UNUM should fairly and fully pay my monthly disability benefits for the diagnosis of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome which impairs my ability to reliably and regularly perform the material and substantial duties of an Emergency Room Physician. To date UNUM owes the following:
Benefits should have started February, 1997 From February 1997 until June, 1999 = 27 months 1997: $6703 X 11 = $73733 + 10% interest = $81106.30 1998 - $6703 + 4% (COLA) = 6971 X 12 = 83653.44 + $81106.30 = $164760 + 10% = $181236 1999 - $6971 + 4% (COLA) = 7250 X 6 months = 43500 + 181236 = $224736 (plus 10% interest per annum) - Total Group up through June 1999.I also expect to be re-imbursed the considerable expenses it has taken me to investigate and prepare this case. Approximately $8000 to $10,000 at present. I can give you a more exact figure if needed.
Because I cannot trust UNUM to continue to pay my monthly benefits, even if I continue to be disabled from my occupation or worsen, I will also expect to be paid a lump sum that would total the amount of benefits I am entitled to until the age of 65. At this point in time my illness is chronic and incurable according to legal definitions.
That would be an extra $6971 X 272 months (until February of the year 2023) = $1,847,152 plus current balance $224736 plus $10,000 expenses.
GRAND TOTAL = $2,081,188 on my disability claim on my group policy.
Interrogatory No. 18
Identify all persons who have knowledge of any relevant facts relating to this case. Include in your answer a brief summary of all relevant facts known by each individual identified.
Answer No. 18
The plaintiff objects to this interrogatory in that it seeks information which is beyond the scope of her personal knowledge, also to the extent that it calls for speculation. Plaintiff also objects that this interrogatory seeks information which is an element of the defendant's burden of proof, the defendant has had the means and opportunity and consent to obtain information from plaintiff's friends, family and associates prior to the time of claim denial and denial of appeal and chose not to obtain this information indicating, prima facie, an inadequate and biased investigation. Furthermore this interrogatory is overbroad, unduly burdensome, and a "fishing expedition" inconsistent with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the concepts of Good Faith. Notwithstanding and without waiving these objections plaintiff states that she fears giving names of witnesses to UNUM will subject them to harassment and therefore, prior to releasing to UNUM names or information on any witness, plaintiff will require from UNUM a sworn affidavit that UNUM, nor any person working for or at the direction of UNUM in any way, will:
1) not attempt to contact plaintiff's witnesses, experts or others in person or by telephone
2) will contact such witnesses only in writing and by mail with a copy of any such correspondence also automatically going to plaintiff at that time
3) that plaintiff's witnesses will not be subjected to surveillance, background checks or other unwarranted intrusions into their privacy
4) if UNUM wishes to question or depose plaintiff's witnesses this will be arranged with plaintiff present in person or by telephone and plaintiff will be allowed to tape record all conversations with potential witnesses in her trial, and be sent a true and correct copy of any written document produced by UNUM related to these witnesses and from these encounters as soon as such document is available to UNUM.
Interrogatory No. 19
Identify all persons who you intend to call as witnesses at trial. Include in your answer a brief summary of the anticipated testimony of each such witness.
Answer No. 19
Same objections as Interrogatory No. 18. The plaintiff objects to this interrogatory in that it is premature and I reserve the right to supplement it according to the Rules of the Court. Furthermore this interrogatory is overbroad, unduly burdensome, and a "fishing expedition." Notwithstanding and without waiving these objections plaintiff states that she fears giving names of witnesses to UNUM will subject them to harassment and therefore, prior to releasing to UNUM names or information on any witness, plaintiff will require from UNUM a sworn affidavit that UNUM, nor any person working for or at the direction of UNUM in any way, will:
1) not attempt to contact plaintiff's witnesses, experts or others in person or by telephone
2) will contact such witnesses only in writing and by mail with a copy of any such correspondence also automatically going to plaintiff at that time
3) that plaintiff's witnesses will not be subjected to surveillance, background checks or other unwarranted intrusions into their privacy
4) if UNUM wishes to question or depose plaintiff's witnesses this will be arranged with plaintiff present in person or by telephone and plaintiff will be allowed to tape record all conversations with potential witnesses in her trial, and be sent a true and correct copy of any written document produced by UNUM related to these witnesses and from these encounters as soon as such document is available to UNUM.
Notwithstanding and without waiving the these objections, the plaintiff states, in general, I plan to have witnesses from the following categories:
1. My treating physicians 2. My insurance agents and/or other insurance experts that can interpret policy provisions 3. Co-workers, friends, family who have direct knowledge of and have observed my physical condition in the last few years, and will testify to the emotional effects of UNUM's actions and this forced litigation upon me, physically, mentally and emotionally. 4. Insurance experts, consumer protections experts, medical experts 5. UNUM's claims adjusters, Dr. Jane Pringle, Dr. Peter Mirkin, James Orr, Steve Harris, Margaret Fast, Carolyn L. Jackson, and other persons from UNUM who were involved in the processing, appeal,
Top of PageJudydoc's Diary PageJudydoc's Home PageInsurance PageUncivilization and its DiscontentsHome Page
Email Judy Morris
at: judydoc AT worldnet DOT att DOT netEmail me, Bill Hammel
at: bhammel AT graham DOT main DOT nc DOT us
The URL for this document is:
http://graham.main.nc.us/~bhammel/INS/DOCS/dni6-072199.html
Created: July 22, 1999
Last Updated: May 28, 2000