Get free answers to your Health Care Law legal questions from lawyers in your area.
Information available: hospital records that were generated by particular person with name and time who generated recordps.
Records were disclosed without authorization to hospice.
If person is affiliated with third party entity to which information was disclosed,
can court... View More 
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
It appears that hospital records were disclosed without authorization to a hospice by a particular person affiliated with the hospital. The identity of this person, including their name and the time they generated the records, is known. The key question is whether a court can order the defendant... View More
Should hearing be scheduled for both motions: for motion for in-camera review of privilege log, and motion to disclose individuals' private information.
Can Motions be combined? They are inter-related.
Can both Motions be heard at the same hearing?
Is Defendant... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
Here is a summary of the typical sequence of steps and timing related to privilege logs and motions to compel production of private information under California law:
1. Motion to Compel Production of Private Information: The party seeking the private information files a motion explaining... View More
Is it defense responsibility:
To compile privilege log
from discovery responses that defenses already provided throughout discovery;
AND inclusive responses that will be provided to the latest discovery that Plaintiff propounds?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
Yes, under California law, it is typically the responsibility of the party asserting a privilege (in this case, the defense) to compile a privilege log for any documents or materials withheld from discovery on the basis of privilege. This includes privileged materials from previous discovery... View More
Such a sequence of actions seems to be more efficient, and eliminates the potential need for Motion to Compel.
Would be be a sequence of steps in this scenario: when Motion for camera review of privilege log, and Motion for court order to disclose private identity data;
are... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
Yes, based on your description, it seems like you are outlining a sequence of steps in the discovery process under California law that would be more efficient and potentially eliminate the need for a Motion to Compel. The sequence you described is:
1. Submitting interrogatories and... View More
What is the most reasonable way for Plaintiff to handle this situation.
Discovery has been in a few iterations. The subject matter of the lawsuit is focused on events on admission and on discharge from hospital. This is when the chain of events that resulted in wrongdoing happened.... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
Based on the information provided and considering California law, here is a reasonable approach for the Plaintiff to handle this situation regarding discovery in the lawsuit:
1. Carefully review the responses received so far to determine what information is still needed to support the... View More
What type of inappropriate objection is this?
Responding party, represented by attorney, does not provide reasonable identification of provider in question;
With objection that propounding party failed to specify what does it mean 'distinct identity'.
What type of objection is this?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
Based on the information provided, it appears that the responding party, represented by an attorney, is making an objection to a request or question from the propounding party. The objection seems to be that the propounding party failed to provide a reasonable identification of the provider in... View More
What statute defines camera review of privilege log, Motion for privilege log?
Can Motion be submitted at any time, before or with Motion to Compel further discovery?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
Under California law, the concept of in camera review of a privilege log is not defined by a specific statute. Instead, it arises from case law and the court's inherent authority to manage discovery disputes.
In camera review is a process where the court privately reviews documents... View More
Plaintiff has proof that records existed in the defendant's custody and were subsequently disclosed to an unauthorized party. How can Plaintiff shift to the defendant burden to prove they did not disclose the information? What statute defines this process?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
In California, the burden of proof can be shifted to the defendant to prove they did not wrongfully disclose the plaintiff's information through a legal doctrine known as "res ipsa loquitur" ("the thing speaks for itself"). This doctrine applies when the incident would not... View More
For a medical malpractice case involving fraud, how to make sure authentic identity data is obtained, protected by privacy rights.
Is in-chamber review of privilege log (including privacy right) a mechanism to do it?
If a court order is required, in addition to/or instead of motion... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
To discover the identities of individuals in a medical malpractice case involving hospice fraud in California, while respecting privacy rights, there are a few key legal mechanisms and statutes to consider:
In-Camera Review: California Evidence Code Section 915 allows for in-camera review... View More
When after 3 rounds of discovery,
in regard to identities of providers critical for the case,
Defendant hospital (without waiving objections) states that defendant 'will produce' provider for deposition, how to confront such harassment?
Unless newborn is meant.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 15, 2024
I'm sorry to hear you're dealing with a frustrating and potentially harassing situation in the discovery process for your legal case. Here are a few thoughts on how to handle this under California law:
1. Meet and confer: California law requires parties to meet and confer in good... View More
All evidence mentioned in response to Extent of Burden of Proof question exists.
However, for completeness if necessary:
Should demand for privilege log and for in-chambers review of privileged information at issue be included into motion to compel?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
Under California law, if a party is withholding documents or information based on a claim of privilege, it is appropriate to demand a privilege log and request an in-camera review of the allegedly privileged material as part of a motion to compel. Here's why including these requests can... View More
What statute defines motion for camera review of privileged info?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
Under California law, the statute that defines the motion for camera review of privileged information is Evidence Code Section 915(b).
Evidence Code Section 915(b) states:
"When a court is ruling on a claim of privilege under Article 9 (commencing with Section 1040) of Chapter... View More
Patient was referred to hospice based on hospitalization record of proven non-existent terminal disease,
recorded on admission to hospital;
Recorded by doctor who referred patient to hospital, thus knew that terminal disease was non-existent;
And record of hospitalization -... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
Under California law, the plaintiff generally has the burden of proof to establish their case by a preponderance of the evidence. However, in the context of unauthorized disclosure of medical records, there are a few key considerations:
1. California Confidentiality of Medical Information... View More
Patient was referred to hospice based on hospitalization record of proven non-existent terminal disease,
recorded on admission to hospital;
Recorded by doctor who referred patient to hospital, thus knew that terminal disease was non-existent;
And record of hospitalization -... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
In a case where a patient was referred to hospice based on a false record of a terminal disease, the plaintiff still has the burden of proving who is responsible for the wrongful actions. This burden of proof requires the plaintiff to present evidence that identifies the individuals or entities... View More
How to request in chambers review of identities, protected under privacy right, when identities are critical to crucial matters at issue of the lawsuit?
What identity attributes shall be requested?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
To request an in chambers review of identities protected under privacy rights in California, you need to file a motion for an in camera review. This motion should explain why the identities are crucial to the case and how their disclosure is necessary for the fair resolution of the lawsuit. Be sure... View More
In compliance with privacy right.
During discovery within legal action what statutes define how to obtain authentic verifiable identities? What attributes define identity for investigation?
What statutes define that for medical malpractice case that involves fraud?
Demands... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
Under California law, obtaining authentic verifiable identities during discovery is governed by several statutes. The California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) sections 2030.010-2030.410 cover interrogatories, and sections 2031.010-2031.060 cover demands for production of documents. These statutes... View More
How to argue that the contract of hospital with doctor and fair market comparison is important for litigation and likely to lead to admissible evidence?
Physician referred patient to hospital, hospital was not covered by patient's insurance plan, but physician's services were covered.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
Under California law, the contract between the hospital and the doctor is crucial for litigation because it can reveal whether there were any financial incentives or agreements influencing the physician's referral practices. This is particularly important in assessing if the doctor had a... View More
Can demand for privilege log include previous responses of responding party, that do not belong to current set that plaintiff propounds?
Previous responses referenced 1157, Cal Evidence Code statutes, etc.
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
Under California law, the scope of a demand for a privilege log is generally limited to the current set of discovery requests propounded by the plaintiff. This means that the privilege log should specifically address the documents and communications that are responsive to the current discovery... View More
Is ccp 1798.3(a) applicable for the definition of identity of a natural person when respondent to discovery, special interrogatory is a private hospital? If not - what statute is applicable?
I need to find out authentic, true, distinct, verifiable information about persons, referenced as... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
Under California law, the definition of identity for a natural person in the context of responding to discovery, such as a special interrogatory, can indeed be guided by the California Civil Code section 1798.3(a). This section defines "personal information" to include any information... View More
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
answered on Jun 14, 2024
Under California law, Delegation of Services Agreements (DSA) between a Physician Assistant (PA) and a supervising physician must be reviewed periodically to ensure they are up-to-date and reflect current practice standards. While the law does not specifically mandate an annual review, it does... View More
Justia Ask a Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask a Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between you and Justia, or between you and any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask a Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
