Tootle v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
SHARP, Judge.
Tootle files a petition for writ of certiora-ri to review an order of the trial court which compelled Dr. Harry Krop, a clinical psychologist who previously examined Tootle, to give his deposition. Because Tootle lacks standing to raise any federal privilege against Krop’s testifying, we deny his petition.
Tootle sued Seaboard after being injured in a train-automobile accident. Seaboard *1010sought to depose Krop, who had examined Tootle for the Social Security Administration. Apparently, the Social Security Administration terminated Tootle’s benefits and is attempting to retrieve some…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Malvin Schechter v. Caspar W. Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1974
- Stiles v. Atlanta Gas Light Co.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 1978
- People of State of California v. RichardsonDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1972
- Hubbard v. Southern Railway CompanyDistrict Court, M.D. Georgia · 1959
- Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n v. MarshallCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1969
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Texas Employers' Insurance Ass'n v. Jackson, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1986
- Ubben v. O.F.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
- Tootle v. Seaboard Coast Line RailroadDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984