 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Favor v. Horne11/6/2003
tain a request for permission to copy the records as part of the discovery process, it makes no sense that records delivered to the courthouse for trial purposes should not also be available for copying so long as there has been compliance with the notice requirements of the statutes. The changes in the (*16)CPLR effective September 1, 2003 apply to all subpoenaed records whether delivered to the court before or after that date. The memorandum of February 2, 1993 has been rendered moot by these changes. Prior to examination of any records, counsel must establish and submit proof that reasonable notice of the intention to do so has been given to all other parties.
In the future the clerk of the court is directed to only require the court's permission before permitting examination of the subpoenaed records by counsel. Absent a clear indication by the health service provider forwarding the records that confidential material is contained therein, there is no need to require additional consents or the intervention of the court before permitting such inspection. In addition to the protections of the CPLR concerning subpoenaed records and discoverable information, the Code of Professional Responsibility provide ethical standards that will prohibit opposing counsel from revealing confidential information inadvertently disclosed that is irrelevant to the issues in the litigation.
This constitutes the decision and order of the Court.
(*17)
PHILIP S. STRANIERE Judge, Civil Court
(*18)
(*19)
|