Daley v. Teruel
107 N.E.3d 1028
Ill. App. Ct.2018Background
- Terri Daley, administrator of Rosalie Jones’s estate, sued Ingalls Memorial Hospital and nurses for alleged malpractice relating to blood-glucose care in Nov. 2013; discovery sought incident reports and complaint files.
- Ingalls withheld four documents (two incident reviews and one complaint relevant to the claim) claiming they were privileged as patient safety work product under the federal Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 (Patient Safety Act); affidavits from Ingalls’ counsel and the hospital’s system (Clarity PSO/HCS portal) supported that the documents were assembled for reporting to a federally certified Patient Safety Organization (PSO).
- The trial court reviewed the documents in camera and ordered limited disclosure of portions it deemed obtained before peer review; Ingalls moved for reconsideration on federal-privilege grounds, refused to comply, and asked for "friendly contempt" for the purpose of appeal; the court found Ingalls in contempt and fined $1.
- On appeal Ingalls argued the documents are patient safety work product protected by the Patient Safety Act and that the Act preempts the state court production order; the appellate court reviewed statutory construction de novo.
- The appellate court concluded the documents met the statutory definition of patient safety work product, the asserted statutory exceptions did not apply, and the Patient Safety Act’s express preemption clause barred the state-court discovery order; it reversed the contempt finding and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the withheld documents "patient safety work product" under the Patient Safety Act? | Documents should be discoverable under Illinois’ broad discovery rules and not all contents are privileged. | Documents were assembled solely for reporting to a federally certified PSO and thus meet the Act’s definition of patient safety work product. | Held: Yes. The documents satisfy the Act’s reporting-pathway criteria (created for reporting, reported, capable of improving safety, dated in the patient safety system). |
| Do statutory exceptions (original medical records / separately collected information / state reporting obligations) defeat the privilege? | The content duplicates medical-record material, may have been created for other purposes (peer review), and Illinois adverse-event reporting law applies. | The documents are not original medical records, were created post-care solely for PSO reporting, and Illinois’ adverse-event reporting requirement was not operational. | Held: No exception applies. Original medical records remain discoverable, but these documents were separate, created for PSO reporting, and Illinois’s adverse‑event reporting system was not in force. |
| Does the Patient Safety Act preempt the state-court production order? | If documents are not PSWP then no preemption; otherwise plaintiff tacitly concedes federal preemption applies only to PSWP. | The Act contains an express preemption clause preventing state subpoenas/discovery of patient safety work product. | Held: Yes. The Act’s express preemption language preempts the trial court’s disclosure order as to materials that qualify as patient safety work product. |
| Was the contempt sanction against Ingalls for refusing to produce the documents proper? | Trial court enforcement of discovery order was proper. | Ingalls acted based on federal privilege and preemption; contempt should be reversed if underlying order invalid. | Held: Reversed. Because the discovery order was preempted/invalid, the contempt finding for noncompliance must be reversed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Department of Financial & Professional Regulation v. Walgreen Co., 2012 IL App (2d) 110452 (App. Ct.) (found pharmacy incident reports were patient safety work product)
- University of Kentucky v. Bunnell, 532 S.W.3d 658 (Ky. Ct. App.) (reports created solely for PSO submission are PSWP)
- Charles v. Southern Baptist Hospital of Florida, Inc., 209 So. 3d 1199 (Fla. 2017) (distinct Florida decision on PSWP and state constitutional access provision)
- Harris v. One Hope United, Inc., 2015 IL 117200 (Ill.) (appeal of contempt based on discovery violation makes underlying discovery order reviewable)
- Jenkins v. Wu, 102 Ill. 2d 468 (Ill.) (limitations of peer-review privileges do not prevent plaintiffs from obtaining medical records, depositions, and expert opinions)