From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bredice v. Doctors Hospital, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Oct 13, 1970
51 F.R.D. 187 (D.D.C. 1970)

Summary

concluding that physician's post-incident report to internal review committee should be protected because “[c]onstructive professional criticism cannot occur in an atmosphere of apprehension that [the analysis] will be used as a denunciation of a colleague's conduct in a [negligence] suit”

Summary of this case from Felder v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.

Opinion

Malpractice suit wherein plaintiff administratrix moved for production and inspection of two classes of documents. An earlier motion requesting the same material had been denied by another judge, 50 F.R.D. 249. The District Court, June L. Green, J., held that the earlier rulings, that minutes and reports of the defendant hospital's staff concerning the death of plaintiff's decedent were qualifiedly privileged and not subject to discovery without showing of exceptional necessity and that certain reports between the hospital and its malpractice carrier sent after the filing of suit were part of attorney's work product would be adhered to.

Objections to request for production sustained.

David J. Humphreys, and Irving R. M. Panzer, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff.

James A. Welch, Washington, D. C., for defendants Zehner, Garnett, Andrina, Tsoi & Stubbs.

David N. Webster, Washington, D. C., for defendant Bailey.

Francis L. Casey, Jr., Washington, D. C., for defendant Romansky.

John L. Laskey, Jackson, Gray & Laskey, Washington, D. C., for defendant Doctors Hospital, Inc.


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

JUNE L. GREEN, District Judge.

Subsequent to July 1, 1970 (the effective date of the amendment to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure), plaintiff filed a request for production of documents by the defendant, Doctors Hospital, Inc., designating the following documents:

1. Minutes and reports of any Board or Committee of Doctors Hospital or its staff concerning the death of Frank J. Bredice on December 11, 1966. 2. Reports, statements or memoranda, including reports to the malpractice carrier, reduced to writing, no matter when or by whom sent, concerning the death of Frank J. Bredice on December 11, 1966.

In each instance, the material requested is the same material which was the subject of plaintiff's earlier Motion for Production and Inspection. The defendant Hospital resisted this Motion, and the Motion was denied by Judge Corcoran of this Court pursuant to his Opinion filed herein on March 11, 1970, 50 F.R.D. 249.

The defendant Hospital has filed its Objections to the present request for production of the documents specified, and both parties have filed memoranda in support of and in opposition to said Objections. The Court has carefully considered the memoranda and oral argument of counsel, as well as the Opinion of Judge Corcoran above referred to. In this Opinion, Judge Corcoran analyzed the considerations of public policy supporting the extension of qualified privilege of confidentiality concerning the subject matter of the meetings of the hospital staff review committees, and this Court now adheres to his ruling that the proceedings at such meetings are entitled to a qualified privilege on the basis of the overwhelming public interest found to exist by Judge Corcoran on the evidence before him.

The Court also adheres to Judge Corcoran's ruling regarding item 2 of the request, all of the material covered by said request having been generated subsequent to the institution of this suit.

Therefore, it is by the Court, this 12th day of October, 1970,

Adjudged, ordered and decreed that the objections of defendant, Doctors Hospital, Inc., to the request for production of documents be and the same hereby are sustained.


Summaries of

Bredice v. Doctors Hospital, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Oct 13, 1970
51 F.R.D. 187 (D.D.C. 1970)

concluding that physician's post-incident report to internal review committee should be protected because “[c]onstructive professional criticism cannot occur in an atmosphere of apprehension that [the analysis] will be used as a denunciation of a colleague's conduct in a [negligence] suit”

Summary of this case from Felder v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.

affirming the District Court's application of the privilege, widely acknowledged as the first court to do so

Summary of this case from Davis v. Kraft Foods North America

recognizing qualified peer review privilege for the purpose of a medical malpractice suit

Summary of this case from U.S. v. United Memorial Hospital

In Bredice, a plaintiff in a malpractice action sought in the course of civil discovery to compel production of the minutes and reports of a hospital medical review committee's investigation of the death of a patient.

Summary of this case from Fed. Trade Comm'n v. TRW, Inc.

extending qualified privilege to the minutes and reports of a hospital review committee

Summary of this case from KD ex rel. Dieffenbach v. United States

In Bredice, the Court addressed the privilege even though it was unnecessary to do so on the facts then before the court.

Summary of this case from Zoom Imaging, L.P. v. St. Luke's Hospital & Health Network

In Bredice, a medical malpractice suit, the plaintiff moved for discovery of medical review board meeting minutes and reports.

Summary of this case from U.S. ex Rel. Sanders v. Allison Engine Co., Inc.

In Bredice, the court held that the plaintiff in a medical malpractice case could not discover the minutes and reports created during the hospital's staff meetings.

Summary of this case from Aramburu v. Boeing Co.

In Bredice, the court was particularly concerned that disclosure of documents containing self-critical analysis would undermine public health and safety.

Summary of this case from Aramburu v. Boeing Co.

In Bredice, a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case sought to discover hospital " peer review" committee minutes and reports.

Summary of this case from Tharp v. Sivyer Steel Corp.

In Bredice, plaintiff sought the minutes and reports of any Board or Committee of defendant hospital or its staff concerning the death of her husband.

Summary of this case from Pagano v. Oroville Hosp.

In Bredice, the court held that the minutes of hospital staff meetings were properly shielded from discovery by the plaintiff in a malpractice suit against the hospital.

Summary of this case from Dowling v. American Hawaii Cruises, Inc.

In Bredice v. Doctors Hospital, Inc., 50 F.R.D. 249 (D.D.C. 1970), aff'd, 479 F.2d 920 (D.C. Cir. 1973), a member of this Court held that minutes and reports of hospital staff meetings, through which the medical staff of hospitals review, analyze, and evaluate the clinical work of their members, are entitled to a qualified privilege.

Summary of this case from Laws v. Georgetown University Hospital

In Bredice, which was a malpractice action, the plaintiff had sought the minutes and reports of a medical staff committee whose sole objective was the improvement of available care and treatment at the hospital based upon a thorough review, analysis and evaluation of the clinical work of staff members.

Summary of this case from Urseth v. City of Dayton, Ohio

In Bredice v. Doctors Hospital, Inc., 50 F.R.D. 249 (D.C.D.C.1070), reaff'd, 51 F.R.D. 187 (D.C.D.C.1970), aff'd, 479 F.2d 920 (CADC 1973), a medical malpractice action, the plaintiff sought to discover minutes and reports of the defendant hospital including those of certain staff meetings the sole objective of which was "... improvement of medical procedures and techniques..." Id at 250.

Summary of this case from Bergman v. Kemp

In Bredice v. Doctors Hospital, Inc., D.C.D.C. (1970), 50 F.R.D. 249, a medical malpractice action, the plaintiff sought to discover minutes and reports of the defendant hospital including those of certain staff meetings the sole objective of which was " * * * the improvement of medical procedures and techniques. * * * " Ibid., 50 F.R.D. at 250(1).

Summary of this case from Lloyd v. Cessna Aircraft Company

In Bredice, the court held that a decedent's administratrix in a medical malpractice suit could not obtain discovery of the minutes and reports of a hospital staff review meeting.

Summary of this case from Harris v. One Hope United, Inc.

In Bredice, the Federal District Court judge created a qualified privilege for the minutes and reports of the medical staff committee of a hospital which had investigated allegations of malpractice against a member of the staff.

Summary of this case from Cronin v. Strayer

In Bredice, a medical malpractice plaintiff sought production of committee proceedings relating to the death of plaintiff's decedent.

Summary of this case from Jenkins v. Wu

In Bredice v. Doctors Hospital, Inc., 50 F. R. D. 249, U.S. Dist. Ct., D.C., in a decision not based upon a statute, the minutes and reports of any board or committee concerning the death of a patient were held to be privileged from discovery.

Summary of this case from Oviatt v. Archbishop Bergan Mercy Hospital

In Bredice v. Doctors Hosp., Inc., 50 F.R.D. 249 (D.D.C., 1970), the plaintiff sought “ ‘[m]inutes and reports of any Board or Committee of Doctors Hospital or its staff’ ” concerning the death of the plaintiff's decedent.

Summary of this case from Harrison v. Munson Healthcare, Inc.

In Bredice v. Doctors Hosp., Inc., 50 F.R.D. 249 (D.D.C. 1970), aff'd, 479 F.2d 920 (D.C. Cir. 1973), the seminal case establishing the privilege, the court emphasized the importance of the expectation of confidentiality held by members of the medical review panel.

Summary of this case from Harris-Lewis v. Mudge, No
Case details for

Bredice v. Doctors Hospital, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Anne M. BREDICE, Administratrix, etc., Plaintiff, v. DOCTORS HOSPITAL…

Court:United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: Oct 13, 1970

Citations

51 F.R.D. 187 (D.D.C. 1970)
50 F.R.D. 249

Citing Cases

Tanner v. McMurray

In 1970, the Honorable Howard Francis Corcoran, then-United States District Judge for the United States…

Whitman by Whitman v. U.S.

On November 16, 1984 this court extended the time for filing briefs and remanded the case for oral argument…