Patients Have an Absolute Right to Know: Another Win for Patients in Med Mal Claims
In the recent past, doctors and other medical providers here in Florida were heavily protected from negligence actions, which included limitations on certain documents which were “discoverable” and on noneconomic damages (pain and suffering, disfigurement, permanent disability, etc.).
December 21, 2017 at 01:15 PM
3 minute read
In the recent past, doctors and other medical providers in Florida were heavily protected from negligence actions, which included limitations on certain documents which were “discoverable” and on noneconomic damages (pain and suffering, disfigurement, permanent disability, etc.). This often limited injured patients in not only proving their cases and the amounts they could recover, but also in finding a lawyer to take their case.
However, the tides are beginning to turn in favor of patients. The shift began this past summer when the Florida Supreme Court in North Broward Hospital District v. Kaitlin held that noneconomic damage caps were unconstitutional.
In addition, the shifting continued Oct. 26 when the Florida Supreme Court in Edwards v. Thomas ruled in support of a broad interpretation of Amendment 7 discovery. While the Kaitlin opinion received national attention, the court's opinion in Edwards flew under the radar of most. However, this opinion should not be overlooked as one first needs the right evidence to establish liability before noneconomic damages can be awarded, and Edwards may provide just that.
In short, Amendment 7 of the Florida Constitution grants patients the right to access all medically adverse incident reports of the health care providers or health care facilities that provided them treatment. The purpose behind Amendment 7 enactment was to grant patients the right to access a medical provider's history of acts, neglects, or defaults that may be important to the patient.
More specifically, Amendment 7 states in part: “In addition to any other similar rights provided herein or by general law, patients have a right to have access to any records made or received in the course of business by a health care facility or provider relating to any adverse medical incident.”
In Edwards, the plaintiff-patient requested a number of records relating to adverse medical incidents that occurred at the defendant-hospital's facility. More specifically, the plaintiff requested external peer review reports which contain performance reviews and assessments of physicians by their peers. The defendant objected arguing that such reports, which are required by law, were not considered adverse medical incidents, were not made in the course of business, and were protected by work-product and attorney-client privilege. However, the Florida Supreme Court disagreed holding that external peer review reports are discoverable. The court noted that “the language in Amendment 7 contains no limitation on the types of adverse medical incident reports that are now discoverable” and that “there is also no qualifying provision in Amendment 7 that limits the scope of discoverable records to those previously barred.” In the end, the court held, “Amendment 7 was aimed at eliminating all discovery restrictions on any records … relating to any adverse medical incident.”
Accordingly, the Florida Supreme Court has now made it clear that medical providers can no longer hide this crucial evidence from patients and their attorneys. Edwards marks another win for patients in the medical malpractice field and should be added to every lawyer's discovery handbook.
Marcus Susen is a partner with Koch Parafinczuk Wolf Susen in Fort Lauderdale. Contact him at [email protected].
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTurning Down the Rancor Around DEI: Re-embracing the Value of—and Values Behind—Workplace Diversity Programs
6 minute readWill Ohtani's 50/50 Ball Be Split 50/50? Fla. Court to Decide Owner of $4.5M Disputed Catch
How the Legislature Can Fix the Middle-Income Affordable Housing Exemption in Fla.'s Live Local Act
8 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250