The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

Skip to Content

Court Rules that Documents Ordered Produced Under “Patient’s Right to Know” Amendment (“Amendment 7”) are not Admissible at Trial

The Honorable Judge Jeffrey M. Fleming granted Osceola Regional Medical Center’s motion in limine for documents produced under Article X, section 25 of the Florida Constitution (“Amendment 7” or “Patient’s Right to Know” Amendment) in: Grafal/Sinclair v. Osceola Regional Medical Center, et al., Case No. 09 CA 1526 (Fla. 9th Cir. Ct. February 9, 2011).

In its order, the Court ruled that Amendment 7 does not affect the Florida statutes that prohibit the admissibility of peer review, risk management and quality assurance records. See §§ 395.0193(8), 395.0197(4), and 766.106(5), Fla. Stat. Thus, to the extent that Amendment 7 renders certain records of adverse medical incidents discoverable, the amendment does not permit these records to be admitted in a court of law.

After the Court’s ruled on this issue, Plaintiffs filed an extensive motion for reconsideration, which was also denied.

Read the Court's Order here.

Related Practices
Health Care
Related Industries
Health Care
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.