FL: plaintiff feared breach of confidentiality: court granted her petition for certiorari.(Hospital Law Decisions of Note)(Case overview)

CASE FACTS: Patricia Dannemann filed suit against Shands Teaching Hospital and Clinics, Inc., alleging that the hospital negligently caused the death of her husband. She sought certiorari to prohibit pre-deposition conferences between nonparty physicians employed by the University of Florida, also a nonparty, and counsel hired by Shands' insurer to represent their physicians at their depositions. She feared physician witnesses would then discuss the decedent's medical condition.

COURT'S OPINION: Because the case was controlled by a previous decision in the Florida case of Hannon v. Roper, 945 So.2d 534, and the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Acosta v. Richter, 761 So.2d 149, the District Court of Appeal of Florida granted the plaintiff's motion for certiorari and quashed the trial court's order. The court held, inter alia, that the legislature created the physician-patient privilege by statute "where none existed before, and [provided] an explicit but limited scheme for the disclosure of personal medical information." The court observed that Shands raised the same constitutional issues that were raised in Harmon. Specifically, Shands contended that our application of certain provision of the law in Hannon, which violates the physician's constitutional right to counsel protected by the free speech clause of the First Amendment. The court observed that despite the fact that even though the court in Hannon did not discuss the constitutional issues raised there, the court's silence supported the necessary conclusion that those issues were considered and rejected. In Hannon the court granted relief based upon specific sections of Texas law, which it could not have done had it been persuaded the status was constitutionally infirm. The court concluded that it was bound by Hannon under the doctrine of stare decisis. The ...