With regard to the first request, the Defendant has a defense to the allegations contained in the Complaint as to Count I, that the records sought are privileged. However, in applying the standard by which the court must consider this Motion to Dismiss, the court must accept the facts as true and favor the non-moving party. While the court may consider items appearing in the record of the case, this court does not believe that it is appropriate at this junction to make a determination as to whether or not the attorney-client privilege applies and if the log provided is sufficient. .As such, the court must deny the Motion to Dismiss as to Count I.
With regard to the second request, the parties disagree as to whether or not the Defendant has produced all records sought. As such, the court must deny the Motion to Dismiss as to Counts II and Ill, as well.
For the reasons stated herein, the Defendants Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.
Katie Rayburn .
Associate Justice of the Superior Court
Date: April 10, 2024