In Re Marriage of Kreiss

Opinion

RUBIN, Acting P. J.

Thomas Kreiss appeals from the court’s postjudgment order refusing to enforce a discovery stipulation. We reverse.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Thomas and Lisa Kreiss married in June 1998. They had one child, Cameron, bom in June 1999. In September 2003, the trial court entered a judgment of dissolution, ending their marriage. The court awarded Thomas sole legal and physical custody of Cameron, and permitted Lisa monitored visitation several days a week. The custody order also permitted Lisa to take Cameron on two one-week monitored vacations a year to visit her mother in Michigan.

In January 2004, Lisa wanted to take Cameron to visit her mother. Five months earlier in August 2003, Lisa had moved into a drag and alcohol rehabilitation facility and, even though she had planned to be there only 30 days, was still living there when she sought permission for the trip to Michigan. Because Thomas believed Lisa’s mental health and ability to care for Cameron had deteriorated in the preceding months, he requested appointment of a professional monitor to accompany Lisa and Cameron on their vacation. In support of the appointment, Thomas asked for discovery of Lisa’s psychiatric records from UCLA Neuropsychiatric Hospital. He based his discovery request on a joint stipulation Lisa and he had signed during their divorce proceedings allowing mutual discovery of psychological evidence. Their stipulation, which the court entered as its own order, stated: “Both parties waive any privilege they may have or contend to have with respect to any mental health professionals or other therapists or medical providers with whom they have consulted or by whom they have been

[1084]

treated, from June of 1998

through the pendency of this action.

This includes any professionals who have consulted with or treated either or both parties, together or separate, from June of 1998

through the pendency of this action

. . . .” (Italics added.)