Allen v. Wright, A06A0662.
| Decision Date | 14 July 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. A06A0662.,A06A0662. |
| Citation | 280 Ga. App. 554,634 S.E.2d 518 |
| Parties | ALLEN et al. v. WRIGHT. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Chambless, Higdon, Richardson, Katz & Griggs, David N. Nelson, Norman C. Pearson III, Martin, Snow, John C. Daniel III, Richard A. Epps, Jr., Macon, for appellants.
Savage, Turner, Pinson & Karsman, William H. Pinson, Jr., Savannah, for appellee.
Love, Willingham, Peters, Gilleland & Monyak, Allen S. Willingham, Atlanta, Robertson, Bodoh & Nasrallah, Matthew G. Narsallah, Marietta, amici curiae.
Ernestine C. Wright filed a medical malpractice action against Thomas M. Allen, M.D., his professional corporation, Four Rivers Orthopedic Associates, P.C., and Meadows Regional Medical Center, Inc. Purporting to comply with OCGA § 9-11-9.2, Wright executed an authorization to release her medical records and filed it contemporaneously with her complaint. Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the authorization executed by Wright did not comply with OCGA § 9-11-9.2 in several respects, most notably in that it did not allow communications between defendants' attorneys and plaintiff's treating physicians outside the presence of and without first notifying plaintiff's attorney. The trial court denied defendants' motions, finding that OCGA § 9-11-9.2 was preempted by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-191; 42 U.S.C. § 1320d et seq. ("HIPAA") and that OCGA § 9-11-9.2 "conflicts with the formal discovery methods recognized under the Georgia Civil Practice Act. . . ." We granted defendants' application for interlocutory appeal to determine issues relating to the enforcement of OCGA § 9-11-9.2.
1. The identical issue raised in this appeal — whether HIPAA preempts OCGA § 9-11-9.2 — was recently decided as a matter of first impression by this Court in Northlake Med. Center v. Queen, 280 Ga.App. ___(2), ___ S.E.2d ___, 2006 WL 1914716 (2006). We agree with the reasoning set forth in Division 2 of that opinion and find it to be controlling here. It follows that the trial court did not err by denying defendants' motion to dismiss Wright's complaint for failure to comply with OCGA § 9-11-9.2.
2. In light of our holding in Division 1, we need not address the parties' remaining arguments.
Judgment affirmed.
I respectfully dissent for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Presiding Judge Andrews in ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Allen v. Wright
...634 S.E.2d 486 (2006) and that "the reasoning set forth in Division 2 of that opinion [is] controlling here." Allen v. Wright, 280 Ga.App. 554, 555(1), 634 S.E.2d 518 (2006). See also Crisp Regional Hosp. v. Sanders, 281 Ga.App. 393, 636 S.E.2d 123 Appellants applied for certiorari to revie......
-
Griffin v. Burden
...HIPAA preempts OCGA § 9-11-9.2. 2. 280 Ga.App. 510, 634 S.E.2d 486 (2006). 3. Id. at 511(2), 634 S.E.2d 486. Accord Allen v. Wright, 280 Ga.App. 554(1), 634 S.E.2d 518 (2006). 4. (Citation omitted.) Santana v. Ga. Power Co., 269 Ga. 127, 129(6), 498 S.E.2d 521 (1998); Ga. Dept. of Correctio......
-
Crisp Regional Hosp., Inc. v. Sanders, A06A0844.
...by this Court in Northlake Med. Center, L.L.C. v. Queen, 280 Ga.App. 510(2), 634 S.E.2d 486 (2006). See also Allen v. Wright, 280 Ga.App. 554(1), 634 S.E.2d 518 (2006) (adopting the reasoning of Northlake on this issue). We find this binding precedent also to be controlling in this case. It......
-
Insurance - Stephen M. Schatz, Stephen L. Cotter, and Bradley S. Wolff
...42 U.S.C.). 12. O.C.G.A. Sec. 9-11-9.2 (2006). 13. Allen v. Wright, 282 Ga. 9, 10-11, 644 S.E.2d 814, 815-16 (2007); Allen v. Wright, 280 Ga. App. 554, 554-55; 634 S.E.2d 518, 519 (2006). 14. 282 Ga. 9, 644 S.E.2d 814 (2007). 15. 282 Ga. App. 176, 638 S.E.2d 330 (2006). 16. See id. 17. Id. ......