Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Care Liability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judge takes HIPAA pre-suit authorization dispute under advisement; final ruling set for Sept. 1
Summary
In a refiled health-care-liability case, defense counsel argued the plaintiff's pre-suit authorization improperly seeks psychotherapy notes and is therefore invalid; the court took the question under advisement and reset a final ruling for Sept. 1, allowing limited discovery on prejudice.
Get email alerts on the Health Care Liability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A Dixon County judge took under advisement a dispute over whether a plaintiff's pre-suit medical-authorization is invalid because it requests psychotherapy notes, and set a final ruling for the court's September 1 docket.
Defense counsel argued the refiled complaint's authorization is not HIPAA-compliant and urged dismissal under Tennessee Code Annotated §29-26-121, saying a psychotherapy-notes authorization cannot be combined with other authorizations. Plaintiff counsel countered that the authorization and notice contain the required elements, that defendants already possess the records from the prior filing and that any requested records are standard medical records, not psychotherapy notes.
Defense counsel: "...this is not something you deal with every day. It's our position that the form is compliant," (plaintiff argument). Defense argued the form is invalid under federal regulations referenced in court argument.
Plaintiff counsel: The plaintiff "substantially complied" with notice requirements and there is no prejudice to defendants because records were previously exchanged, counsel said; counsel asked for limited discovery if the court wished further evidence of prejudice.
Judge action: The judge said he had not had an opportunity to fully review the filings and would take the matter under advisement. He reset the final ruling for September 1 and allowed the parties to pursue discovery on the limited question of prejudice during the interim.
Authorities cited in court included Tennessee Code Annotated §29-26-121 (pre-suit notice requirements for health-care-liability actions) and federal HIPAA rules on psychotherapy notes (as discussed by counsel). The court did not issue a dispositive ruling at the docket call and left the record open for targeted discovery.

