341 P.3d 466
Ariz. Ct. App.2014Background
- Sunwest challenges the trial court's order compelling production of emails, a consultant report, and incident tracking logs from its quality assurance committee.
- Sunwest asserts the disputed documents are privileged under the federal Nursing Home Reform Amendments, 42 U.S.C. § 1396r.
- Arizona accepted jurisdiction via special action because no equally plain remedy by appeal existed and the issue was a purely legal question of statewide importance.
- The court granted partial relief, ordering disclosure of emails and the consultant report but not of the incident tracking logs.
- Factual context involves George Young's 2011 fall and death at Sunwest; claims included wrongful death and Adult Protective Services violations.
- The incident logs contained clinical data and nonclinical data (charts, schedules) related to quality assurance, with mixed treatment under federal disclosures.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 1396r disclosure restriction applies | Sunwest relies on § 1396r(b)(l)(B) to shield records. | Young contends the committee records are discoverable. | Statute applies to records generated by the quality assurance committee for QA purposes. |
| Are emails generated by QA committee members privileged | Beal/Granger emails involve QA committee activity and are privileged. | Emails show some authorship by non-committee members, breaking privilege. | Emails not protected; waiver due to participation by non-members. |
| Is the consultant's QA report protected | Report was created for QA purposes and forwarded to the committee. | Report existed irrespective of QA and was not generated by the committee. | Report not protected; disclosure required. |
| Are incident tracking logs protected | Logs are records of QA-generated data for quality assurance. | Logs include CMS-required clinical data and nonclinical data; only the QA-generated portion may be protected. | Logs are protected to the extent generated and used by the QA committee; trial court erred in ordering disclosure. |
Key Cases Cited
- Jane Doe, 757 N.Y.S.2d 507 (N.Y. 2003) (records created by committee for QA purposes protected)
- Jewish Home of Eastern PA v. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 693 F.3d 359 (3d Cir. 2012) (federal QA privilege limits)
- Boone Ret. Ctr. v. Hamilton, 946 S.W.2d 740 (Mo. 1997) (record generated by/at behest of QA committee implications)
- State v. Kinney, 241 P.3d 914 (Ariz. App. 2010) (waiver discretion in appellate review of waived issues)
- State v. Payne, 225 P.3d 1131 (Ariz. App. 2009) (discretion to address waived issues to uphold ruling)
- Continental Lighting & Contracting, Inc. v. Premier Grading & Utilities, LLC, no official reporter cited in text (App. 2011) (waiver/arguments not preserved in trial court)
- In re Subpoena Duces Tecum to Jane Doe, Esq., No official reporter cited in text (N.Y. 2003) (outside-party records review under QA context)
- Jane Doe, 757 N.Y.S.2d 507, 787 N.E.2d 618 (N.Y. 2003) (QA-generated data with mixed clinical/nonclinical data)