ARLENE HAYWOOD, M.D., AND ARLENE HAYWOOD, M.D., P.A., PETITIONERS,
v.
JOHN SAMAI AND SHEILA SAMAI, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIANS OF CHERISE SAMAI, 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.
The trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by compelling the production of nonparty patient names and telephone numbers, which are irrelevant and invade privacy.
[1] A writ of common law certiorari is appropriate when a trial court departs from the essential requirements of law and no adequate remedy exists on appeal.
[2] Discovery of nonparty patient names and telephone numbers is not permissible when such information is irrelevant and constitutes an invasion of privacy.
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 intelligencePetitioners sought a writ of certiorari after the trial court granted plaintiffs' motion to compel production of a doctor's appointment book containin…
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 Common Law Writ Of Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING AND/OR CLARIFICATION
GUNTHER, Judge.
We grant respondents’ motion for rehearing and/or clarification, withdraw our earlier opinion and substitute the following:
We grant the petition for "writ of common law certiorari in this malpractice action because the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law and there is no adequate remedy on appeal.
Citing McCann v. Foisy, 552 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), as well as other cases, petitioners argue that the trial court erred in granting plaintiffs’ motion to compel production of the defendant doctor’s appointment book containing nonparty patient names and telephone numbers. According to the petitioners, revealing the identity of nonparty patients constitutes an invasion of privacy and is not relevant evidence subject to discovery in this medical negligence case.
In their response, respondents/plaintiffs argue that the appointment book with the names and telephone numbers of nonparty patients is relevant in the determination of whether the petitioner doctor was overextended by too many other patients’ appointments or whether she could have responded to the plaintiff mother’s calls for help. However, we conclude that the actual names and telephone numbers would not be required for that determination. Petitioners could simply be directed to produce the appointment book, with all identifying information about non-party patients (names, addresses, telephone numbers, etc.) deleted. These patients simply could be acknowledged by dates and times of office visits.
Thus, we agree with petitioners’ argument that nonparty patients names and telephones numbers are irrelevant and that revealing their names and telephone numbers would be an invasion of privacy. Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of common law certiorari and quash the order compelling production of the names and telephone numbers of the nonparty patients listed in Dr. Haywood’s appointment book for the month of December, 1989.
CERTIORARI GRANTED AND ORDER QUASHED.
DELL, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Berkeley v. Eisen, 699 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…, 653 So. 2d 1030 (Fla.1995); Rasmussen. Privacy rights are protected without sacrificing the ability to discover legitimate information where the trial court redacts from the records all identifying information. See, e.g., Amente; Haywood v. Samai, 624 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); CAC-Ramsay. Here, however, the Eisens have already been provided with document discovery by Berkeley that includes the trade allocation sheets and the names .of the individuals involved in the trades; they now seek the remaining…1 / 2
-
Colonial Med. Specialties of S. Fla., Inc. v. United Diagnostic Labs., Inc., 674 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…tients’ rights of privacy and confidentiality of their medical records are protected where trial court requires that all identifying information be redacted from medical records to be produced in medical malpractice action); [*924] Haywood v. Samai, 624 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). Here, it appears the trial court failed to conduct any in-camera inspection of the records to ascertain whether they contained privileged information. From a practical standpoint, such in-camera inspection would probably be un…
-
Cac-Ramsay Health Plans, Inc. v. Cary J. Johnson, 641 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)…which is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Clearly, some of those files do not contain information relevant to Johnson’s claim. Thus, the request is overbroad. Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.280(b)(1); see Haywood v. Samai, 624 So. 2d 1154 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). “[T]he party seeking discovery of confidential information must make a showing of necessity which outweighs the countervailing interest in maintaining the confidentiality of such information.” Higgs v. Kampgrounds of Am., 526 S…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bishop v. State, 552 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)
- James W. McCANN, Jr., M.D. v. Foisy, 552 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)