Orr v. Sievert
| Decision Date | 22 June 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 63881,63881 |
| Parties | ORR b/n/f v. SIEVERT et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Robert John White, Sidney F. Wheeler, Michael T. Bennett, Atlanta, Edward J. Walsh, Decatur, for appellant.
George W. Hart, Terrance C. Sullivan, Robert L. Pennington, Daniel S. Reinhardt, Sidney F. Wheeler and Ben S. Williams, Atlanta, for appellee.
Physician-Patient Privilege. Battajoh "Tony" Orr, a young child, was brought to South Fulton Hospital by his mother for observation and treatment. Tony was diagnosed as suffering from "flu," appropriate medication was prescribed, and he was released back home in care of his mother. After several days of no improvement and increasing lethargy and other physical signs of deterioration, Tony was brought back to South Fulton and admitted as a patient for observation. At this time, a tentative diagnosis of menengitis was made. Tony was then transferred to Egleston Clinic at Emory Hospital for more detailed examination and treatment.
Ultimately the menengitis diagnosis was abandoned and a CAT scan established that Tony was suffering from an abcess of the brain. This abcess was surgically removed and a subsequently diagnosed second abcess was also removed. After these operations, Tony experienced changes both physically and emotionally. Tony's mother, Mrs. Orr, then brought a medical malpractice suit against Tri-City Emergency Group, P.A., the professional association who provided the physicians conducting emergency room procedures at South Fulton, and a Dr. Harris, a member of that association who originally admitted Tony and treated him for the "flu."
Tri-City was insured for medical malpractice by St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company. Tri-City obtained answers to interrogatories from Mrs. Orr and determined that Drs. Sievert and Potts had treated Tony at South Fulton and had recommended Tony's transfer to Egleston. After transfer to Egleston, Tony's treatment was continued by Drs. Sievert and Potts as well as by a neurosurgeon, Dr. O'Brien, who performed the surgical procedures. (Each of these doctors were insured also by St. Paul.) One of the answers to the interrogatories indicated that treatment information from these doctors could be obtained from medical records or by an exchange of information. Tri-City (St. Paul as insurer) then sought through its firm of attorneys to obtain affidavits as to medical treatment and expert opinion from Drs. Sievert, Potts, and O'Brien whether the treatment afforded by Dr. Harris had been in accordance with accepted medical procedures. These affidavits were provided in support of a summary judgment filed by Tri-City and Dr. Harris. Mrs. Orr then ascertained that Drs. Sievert, Potts and O'Brien had not sought or obtained a release from Mrs. Orr for the release of medical information or opinions rendered in their affidavits. Mrs. Orr then filed a complaint against Drs. Sievert, Potts and O'Brien, as well as Emory University Clinic (the professional association of which Dr. O'Brien was a member) and St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. for conspiring to deprive Tony of his rights in the suit against Tri-City and Dr. Harris by violating Tony's right to privacy and violating their implied duty to refrain from disclosing medical treatment involving their patient (Tony) without a release, a subpoena or a request for medical information executed in a legal form. Based upon the above statement of facts, appellees (doctors and their common insurer, St. Paul) sought summary judgment in the instant case. The trial court granted summary judgment to all the defendants and appellant, Mrs. Orr, brings her appeal complaining of the action of the trial court. Held :
Certain principles are not in dispute. In Georgia there is no patient-physician privilege; nevertheless because of the Hypocratic oath taken by all doctors, a doctor is not required to release information concerning a patient unless required to do so by subpoena or other appropriate court order or authorized to do so by this patient or otherwise waived by the patient (Code Ann. § 38-418). A physician who releases information upon written authorization or other waiver by the patient or under court order or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wilson v. Ihc Hosps., Inc.
...a doctor who possesses the most relevant information and opinions” regarding the patient's medical treatment. Orr v. Sievert, 162 Ga.App. 677, 292 S.E.2d 548, 550 (1982).¶ 102 Next, the Wilsons contend that IHC's ex parte meetings improperly influenced Dr. Stoddard's expert opinion. Specifi......
-
Carson v. Fine
...Court, 221 Cal.App.3d 181, 270 Cal.Rptr. 401 (1990). The court so held after citing the following language from Orr v. Sievert, 162 Ga.App. 677, 292 S.E.2d 548 (1982): [W]e discern no restraint upon a doctor who has entered into a patient-doctor relationship and treated a patient from rende......
-
Butler-Tulio v. Scroggins
...San Diego, 221 Cal. App.3d 181, 270 Cal.Rptr. 401 (1990); Richbow v. District of Columbia, 600 A.2d 1063 (D.C.1991); Orr v. Sievert, 162 Ga. App. 677, 292 S.E.2d 548 (1982); Cates v. Wilson, 321 N.C. 1, 361 S.E.2d 734 (1987); Trujillo v. Puro, 101 N.M. 408, 683 P.2d 963 (Ct.App.1984); Carso......
-
Petrillo v. Syntex Laboratories, Inc.
...with a plaintiff's treating physician. (See, e.g. Stempler v. Spiedell (1985), 100 N.J. 368, 495 A.2d 857; Orr v. Sievert (1982), 162 Ga.App. 677, 292 S.E.2d 548; Lazorick v. Brown (1984), 195 N.J.Super. 444, 480 A.2d 223; Doe v. Lilly (D.D.C.1983), 99 F.R.D. 126.) We find the reasoning of ......