DAVID S. TEPERSON, M. D., DRS. JOSE & TEPERSON, P. A., STEPHEN Z. GERVIN, M. D., AND STEPHEN Z. GERVIN, M. D., P. A., PETITIONERS,
v.
FRANK J. DONATO AND L. ANN DONATO, RESPONDENTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Physicians sought certiorari review of an order requiring production of medical records from non-party patients to defend against a medical malpractice action. The court held that discovery of medical records from persons not party to the action violates the privacy rights of those third parties and is unnecessary to establish the standard of care.
The court held that it is error to order production of medical records of persons not party to the action. The standard of care in medical malpractice cases can be established through other methods of proof without invading the medical records of third-party strangers.
[1] A trial court errs in ordering the production of medical records of persons who are not parties to a medical malpractice action.
[2] The standard of care in a medical malpractice action can be proven through methods other than the invasion of medical records of non-parties.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The question of medical malpractice is whether or not the doctor, in treating the plaintiff, used a standard of care commensurate with that used in the community and that question can be answered by utilizing other methods of proof than the invasion into medical records of strangers.”
Establishes the core legal principle that discovery of third-party medical records is unnecessary and improper to establish standard of care in medical malpractice cases
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRespondents filed a medical malpractice complaint against physician petitioners after obtaining a finding from the medical mediation panel. Respondent…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Invasion Of Privacy cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
David S. Teperson, M.D., et al., defendants in a medical malpractice action, seek, by certiorari, review of an order denying in part their motion for protection and requiring them to produce copies of certain medical records.
The respondents filed a complaint alleging medical malpractice against the petitioners, after the respondents had fully complied with the medical mediation action and received a finding of the medical mediation panel. Petitioners responded to this complaint in the form of a motion to dismiss, stating that the complaint failed to allege any specific deviations from the proper standard of care and, thus, did not state a cause of action for medical malpractice.
The respondents subpoenaed the medical records custodian of the Biscayne Medical Center, directing him to bring to the deposition any and all records in the possession of the hospital indicating all surgeries performed at the hospital by the petitioners and all records showing the petitioners’ patient going from surgery to intensive care. To block this subpoena duces tecum, the petitioners filed a motion for protection requesting that the trial court enter an order quashing the subpoena duces tecum served upon the Biscayne Medical Center. After a hearing, the trial court entered the order under review partially denying the petitioners’ motion for protection and ordering that the Biscayne Medical Center produce copies of the operative notes and intensive care records pertaining to all patients who underwent back operations by the petitioners. However, the trial court ordered that the names of all such patients shall be deleted or otherwise removed from any such records that are produced. From that order, the petitioners now file this petition for certiorari review.
The trial court erred in partially denying the petitioners’ motion for protection. This issue has recently been determined in favor of the petitioners. Argonaut Insurance Co. v. Peralta, 358 So. 2d 232 (Fla.3d DCA 1978). In Argonaut, this court held that it was error for the trial court to order the production of medical records of persons not a party to the action: “The question of medical malpractice is whether or not the doctor, in treating the plaintiff, used a standard of care commensurate with that used in the community and that question can be answered by utilizing other methods of proof than the invasion into medical records of strangers.”
Therefore, the order under review requiring production is quashed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bernadette Amente v. Willie B. Newman, M.D., 653 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 1995)…(hospital was not required to answer interrogatory concerning hospitalization records of patients not involved in the suit because it would “impermissibly compromise their right to the confidentiality of their medical records”); Teperson v. Donato, 371 So. 2d 703, 704 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (order requiring production of non-party’s medical records was error because the question in medical malpractice is whether the doctor used a standard of care commensurate with that used in the community, and this question ca…
-
Crandall v. Michaud, 603 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…o. 2d 963 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), and Argonaut Insurance Co. v. Peralta, 358 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 364 So. 2d 889 (Fla.1978). See also Fidelity & Cas. Co. of New York v. Lopez, 375 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), and Teperson v. Donato, 371 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Petitioners urge additionally that pursuant to section 455.241, Florida Statutes (1991), patient records may not be furnished to, and the medical condition of patients may not be discussed with, anyone but the patient, his legal…
-
Willie B. Newman, M.D. v. Bernadette Amente and Solomon Amente, 634 So. 2d 305 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…ld be irreparable. We realize that there is a conflict among our sister courts on this issue. The Third District Court of Appeal has adopted the position that disclosure is inappropriate. North Miami Gen. Hosp., 397 So. 2d 1033; Teperson v. Donato, 371 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Peralta, 358 So. 2d 232. The Second District Court of Appeal has followed the position of the Third District. Leiken-sohn v. Cornwell, 434 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). The Fourth District Court of Appeal has a contrary view. I…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Peralta, 358 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)