CAMERON JOHNSON, BY AND THROUGH HIS PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIANS, ROSE JOHNSON AND ERROL JOHNSON; ROSE JOHNSON AND ERROL JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY, PETITIONERS,
v.
MT. SINAI MEDICAL CENTER OF GREATER MIAMI, INC., RESPONDENT
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.
Florida appellate court denied certiorari, holding that a trial court order permitting one-way interviews where defense counsel speaks to treating physicians without discussing the patient's medical condition does not violate the physician-patient confidentiality statute.
A trial court order authorizing defense counsel to advise treating physicians about case issues without the physicians discussing the patient's medical condition does not violate Florida's physician confidentiality statute.
[1] A physician confidentiality statute prohibiting discussion of a patient's medical condition does not prevent defense counsel from conducting a one-way interview in which…
Previewing 1 of 1 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 medical condition of a patient may not be discussed [by a health care provider] with any person other than the patient or his legal representative or other health care providers involved in the care or treatment of the patient, except upon written authorization of the patient”
Statement of the relevant statutory provision from Section 455.241(2), Florida Statutes (1991)
Cameron Johnson, an infant, was involved in a medical malpractice case against Mt. Sinai Medical Center. The trial court authorized a limited intervie…
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 Patient Confidentiality cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is a petition for a writ of certiorari, filed by the plaintiffs in a medical malpractice case involving an infant, which seeks review of a trial court order authorizing a severely limited interview of the infant’s treating physicians by counsel for the defendant in the case. The plaintiffs urge that the authorized interview is prohibited by Section 455.241(2), Florida Statutes (1991), which provides in relevant part that “the medical condition of a patient may not be discussed [by a health care provider] with any person other than the patient or his legal representative or other health care providers involved in the care or treatment of the patient, except upon written authorization of the patient.” § 455.241(2), Fla. Stat. (1991).
We disagree with this argument and deny the petition for a writ of certiorari because the order under review (1) expressly prohibits the infant’s treating physicians from discussing the medical condition of the infant with defense counsel at the subject interview in accord with the above statute, and (2) solely authorizes defense counsel (a) to advise the physicians about the issues of the case, and (b) to advise the physicians of any matter not otherwise prohibited by law, which is clearly not proscribed by the above statute. In essence, the order authorizes a one-way interview between defense counsel and the subject physicians in which the physicians essentially remain silent and the defense counsel do all the talking. Plainly, such an interview is not prohibited in any way by Section 455.241(2), Florida Statutes (1991).
Certiorari denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rudolph Acosta, M.D. v. Richter, 671 So. 2d 149 (Fla. 1996)…ANSTEAD, Justice. 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 a broad physician-patient priv…1 / 3
-
Richter v. Frank J. Bagala, M.D., 647 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…the petitioners’ medical contention with the physicians, it does not violate the statute. The respondents, as well as the trial court in its ruling, rely upon the Third District Court of Appeal’s holding in Johnson v. Mt. Sinai Medical Center, Inc., 615 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), in advancing this position. We agree that in Johnson our sister court approved an order which prohibited the attorneys from discussing the patient’s medical condition with the treating physicians. It went further, however, and in…
-
Juan Castillo-Plaza, M.D. v. Green, 655 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…tionwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 566 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (non-medical malpractice action), review dismissed, 574 So. 2d 142 (Fla.1990); Phillips v. Ficarra, 618 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (same); Johnson v. Mount Sinai Medical Ctr., Inc., 615 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (malpractice action); Kirkland v. Middleton, 639 So .2d 1002 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (same), review dismissed, 645 So. 2d 453 (Fla.1994); Richter v. Bagala, 647 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (same), review granted sub nom. Acosta v. R…1 / 4