Investigators relying on confidential hospital records to evaluate a physician's work performance cannot be compelled to testify in malpractice suits, the California Supreme Court ruled. Neither can investigators' written conclusions be admitted as evidence if they were based substantially on material derived from those records, the Court ruled unanimously.
March 17, 2000 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Investigators relying on confidential hospital records to evaluate a physician’s work performance cannot be compelled to testify in malpractice suits, the California Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
Neither, the court held unanimously, can investigators’ written conclusions be admitted as evidence if they were based substantially on material derived from those records.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
