Medina v. Medina Gen. Hosp.
2011 Ohio 3990
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Medina sued Medina General Hospital in a wrongful death action with claims of medical malpractice and negligence.
- During discovery Medina asked the Hospital to identify how many times Lana Mitchell, the sole anesthesia provider, signed an anesthesia record for general anesthesia procedures in a specified period.
- Interrogatories sought the date of each procedure and whether Mitchell charted end-tidal CO2 values.
- The trial court allowed discovery but limited the time frame to nine months before Victor Medina’s surgery, finding the data non-privileged.
- The Hospital appealed asserting that answering would disclose confidential medical information protected by physician-patient privilege and HIPAA; Medina cross-appeal framed the data as non-privileged, time data.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the discovery order violates physician-patient privilege or HIPAA. | Medina contends the data sought is non-privileged time data not confidential. | Hospital argues answering would disclose confidential nonparty medical records and PHI under R.C. 2317.02 and HIPAA. | No privilege or PHI disclosure; order affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Antill, 176 Ohio St. 61 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1964) (physician-patient privilege to encourage disclosure)
- Roe v. Planned Parenthood S.W. Ohio Region, 122 Ohio St.3d 399 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2009) (nonparty medical records are confidential; redaction does not create right to discovery)
- Ward v. Summa Health Sys., 128 Ohio St.3d 212 (Ohio Supreme Court, 2010) (physician-patient privilege is not absolute; communications protected, but some information may be discoverable)
- Lemley v. Kaiser, 6 Ohio St.3d 258 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1983) (burden on proponent to show information is confidential or privileged; abuse standard of review for protective orders)