Practice Economics

Court: Fla. malpractice reform doesn’t violate HIPAA


 

References

A federal appeals court has upheld a Florida tort reform law that enables physician defendants to have equal access to plaintiffs’ health information, ruling that the state law does not violate federal patient privacy protections.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision means Florida doctors can be better prepared for malpractice lawsuits and better able to defend themselves, said Jeff Scott, director of legal and governmental affairs for the Florida Medical Association. Before the reform, plaintiffs’ attorneys could obtain information from a patient’s treating physicians, but defense attorneys could not access the same doctors until the deposition period – and only with the patient’s attorney present.

“The impact (of the ruling) is: It’s going to level the playing field in medical malpractice cases by giving defendant physicians the same access to crucial expert witnesses that the plaintiff has,” Mr. Scott said in an interview.

Jeff Scott

Jeff Scott

As part of the 2013 law, prospective plaintiffs must execute a written form that authorizes defendants to obtain documents and conduct ex parte interviews of the plaintiff’s medical providers. The form is a precondition to filing a medical negligence claim.

A patient who planned to sue a Florida family physician asked a federal district court to vacate the rule, arguing that the law violated his privacy. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida concluded the law would result in disclosure of the patient’s HIPAA-protected health information without his consent. That court ruled HIPAA preempted the state law.

The appeals court overturned. In its opinion, the three-judge panel said the Florida law is fully compliant with HIPAA and should stand.

“Had the drafters of the HIPAA regulations wished to preclude a state legislature from conditioning a public benefit – such as filing a lawsuit – on signing a HIPAA authorization, they could have easily done so, just as they generally prohibited doctors from conditioning medical treatment on signing a HIPAA authorization,” the appellate judges said in their decision.

“Further, an individual’s decision to sign an authorization prior to bringing a medical negligence claim in state court is not an involuntary one,” the appeals court noted. “If an individual does not wish to execute such an authorization, he does not have to. He is, however, precluded from using the Florida courts to obtain relief through a medical negligence lawsuit against a health care provider.”

Florida is not the first state to adopt the ex parte communications lawsuit rule. Both Texas and Tennessee have enacted similar statutes. In 2009, the Texas Supreme Court upheld the state’s rule, and in 2013, the Tennessee Supreme Court followed suit.

agallegos@frontlinemedcom.com


On Twitter @legal_med

Recommended Reading

Doctors share the wealth with congressional candidates
MDedge Neurology
Physician candidates playing key role in midterm elections
MDedge Neurology
Auditors collected $57 million from physicians in 2013
MDedge Neurology
AMA study: Wellpoint dominates the insurance market
MDedge Neurology
Audits are more likely under Medicare Advantage
MDedge Neurology
Curbing opioid abuse could be a quality of care issue
MDedge Neurology
Specialty drugs: High cost, high value
MDedge Neurology
Malpractice premiums remained flat in 2014
MDedge Neurology
Selling your practice
MDedge Neurology
Many will be automatically re-enrolled in ACA plans
MDedge Neurology