in Re Nikki Lauren Morgan
2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 11810
| Tex. App. | 2016Background
- Nathaniel Morgan sued for divorce from Nikki Morgan and sought conservatorship and support; discovery sought Nikki’s medical, psychological, and psychiatric records since 2011.
- Nathaniel served a request for production asking for Nikki’s medical treatment records, including treatment for Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD).
- Nikki objected asserting scope, burden, and the physician–patient privilege; Nathaniel moved to compel and the trial court conducted an in-camera review of some records.
- The trial court found the records privileged but concluded the litigation exception to the physician–patient privilege applied and ordered production of records relating to Nikki’s RSD treatment.
- Nikki filed a petition for writ of mandamus asking the appellate court to vacate the portion of the trial-court order requiring production of her RSD medical records.
- The appellate court reviewed whether (1) pleadings put Nikki’s medical condition at issue such that the litigation exception applied and (2) whether the trial court’s production order was overbroad.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the litigation exception to the physician–patient privilege applies to Nikki’s RSD records | Nathaniel argued he relied on Nikki’s physical condition as part of his claim/defense, making the records relevant under the litigation exception | Nikki argued no pleading puts her medical condition at issue, so the litigation exception does not apply | Court held exception inapplicable: no pleadings made Nikki’s condition an ultimate issue; trial court abused its discretion in ordering production |
| Whether the trial court’s production order was overbroad under Ramirez | Nathaniel implicitly relied on broader discovery of medical records related to the nerve disorder | Nikki argued the order was overbroad and not compliant with Ramirez’s limits | Court did not reach merits because it found the litigation exception did not apply; ordered trial court to vacate production requirement |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124 (Tex. 2004) (mandamus standard: show abuse of discretion and lack of adequate appellate remedy)
- Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc., 701 S.W.2d 238 (Tex. 1985) (tests for abuse of discretion)
- Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833 (Tex. 1992) (trial court has no discretion in determining the law; failure to apply law is abuse of discretion)
- R.K. v. Ramirez, 887 S.W.2d 836 (Tex. 1994) (physician–patient privilege and the litigation exception; condition must be an ultimate issue)
- In re Union Pac. R.R. Co., 459 S.W.3d 127 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2015) (litigation exception inapplicable where medical condition is tangential and not an ultimate issue)