Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Acosta v. Richter

Acosta v. Richter

Supreme Court of Florida

January 18, 1996, Decided

No. 84,413

Opinion

 [*150]  ANSTEAD, J.

We have for review Richter v. Bagala, 647 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994), which expressly and directly conflicts with the opinion in Johnson v. Mount Sinai Medical Center, Inc., 615 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). 1 We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed below, we approve Richter, disapprove Johnson, and hold that section 455.241(2), Florida Statutes (1993), provides for [**2]  a broad physician-patient privilege of confidentiality for a patient's medical information and a limited exception to the privilege for disclosure by a defendant physician in a medical negligence action in order for the physician to defend herself.

FACTS

Nancy Richter and Gary Richter filed a medical negligence action against Frank J. Bagala, M.D., and Rudolph Acosta, M.D. During pre-trial proceedings, Dr. Acosta sought an order approving ex parte conferences between his counsel and the plaintiffs' treating physicians. Dr. Bagala joined in the request. The trial court granted the request and authorized defense counsel to have ex parte discussions with [**3]  the Richters' treating physicians. 2 The Richters sought review by certiorari, and the Second District Court of Appeal quashed the trial court order, Richter, 647 So. 2d at 217, and acknowledged conflict with the Third District decision in Johnson.

LAW and ANALYSIS

At issue is whether defense counsel in a medical negligence action is barred from having an ex parte conference with a claimant's current treating physicians under the provisions of section 455.241(2), Florida Statutes (1993).

Physician-Patient Privilege

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

671 So. 2d 149 *; 1996 Fla. LEXIS 20 **; 21 Fla. L. Weekly S 29

RUDOLPH ACOSTA, M.D., Petitioner, v. NANCY RICHTER, et vir, Respondents.

Subsequent History:  [**1]  Rehearing Denied April 4, 1996. Released for Publication April 4, 1996.

Prior History: Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal - Direct Conflict of Decisions Second District - Case No. 94-01017 (Hillsborough County).

CORE TERMS

patient, medical negligence, healthcare provider, confidentiality, disclosure, physician-patient, written authority, medical record, medical condition, ex parte, subpoena, reasonable expectation, medical information, treating physician, proper notice, records, defense counsel, sentence, cases, treatment of a patient, legal representative, evidentiary hearing, deposition, provisions, medical malpractice action, patient information, care and treatment, legislative intent, communications, claimant's

Evidence, Privileges, Doctor-Patient Privilege, General Overview, Civil Procedure, Discovery & Disclosure, Discovery, Subpoenas, Healthcare Law, Medical Treatment, Patient Confidentiality, Torts, Procedural Matters, Discovery, Governments, Courts, Authority to Adjudicate, Malpractice & Professional Liability, Healthcare Providers, Legislation, Interpretation, Psychotherapist-Patient Privilege, Elements, Waiver, Scope, Exceptions, Judicial Precedent