Opinion ID: 874086
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Pursuant to Idaho Code Section 39-1392e(f), Did the Filing of this Lawsuit Waive Defendants' Right to Assert the Peer Review Privilege?

Text: Plaintiffs contend that pursuant to Idaho Code section 39-1392e(f), the peer review privilege was waived in its entirety by the filing of this lawsuit. That statute provides: If any physician, emergency medical services personnel, patient, person, organization or entity whose conduct, care, chart, behavior, health or standards of ethics or professional practice is the subject of investigation, comment, testimony, dispositive order of any kind or other written or verbal utterance or publication or act of any such health care organization or any member or committee thereof in the course of research, study, disciplinary proceeding or investigation of the sort contemplated by this act, makes claim or brings suit on account of such health care organization activity, then, in the defense thereof, confidentiality and privilege shall be deemed waived by the making of such claim, and such health care organization and the members of their staffs and committees shall be allowed to use and resort to such otherwise protected information for the purpose of presenting proof of the facts surrounding such matter, and this provision shall apply whether such claim be for equitable or legal relief or for intentional or unintentional tort of any kind and whether pressed by a patient, physician, emergency medical services personnel, or any other person, but such waiver shall only be effective in connection with the disposition or litigation of such claim, and the court shall, in its discretion, enter appropriate orders protecting, and as fully as it reasonably can do so, preserving the confidentiality of such materials and information. Specifically, Plaintiffs rely upon that portion of the statute providing as follows: If any physician ... whose conduct [or] care ... is the subject of investigation ... makes claim or brings suit on account of such health care organization activity, then, in the defense, thereof, confidentiality and privilege shall be deemed waived by the making of such claim, and such health care organization and the members of their staffs and committees shall be allowed to use and resort to such otherwise protected information for the purpose of presenting proof of the facts surrounding such matter.... (Emphasis theirs.) They argue that if the health care organization has the option of using otherwise privileged information when a physician brings a claim against it, then the physician bringing the lawsuit should also have that option. As stated above, Idaho Code section 39-1392e(f) applies to this lawsuit. The waiver provision states that when a physician, who has been the subject of investigation of the sort contemplated by this act, makes claim or brings suit on account of such health care organization activity, then, in the defense thereof, confidentiality and privilege shall be deemed waived by the making of such claim. The key language in this provision is: then, in the defense thereof, confidentiality and privilege shall be deemed waived by the making of such claim, and such health care organization and the members of their staffs and committees shall be allowed to use and resort to such otherwise protected information for the purpose of presenting proof of the facts surrounding such matter .... (Emphasis added.) When determining the plain meaning of a statute, effect must be given to all the words of the statute if possible, so that none will be void, superfluous, or redundant. In re Winton Lumber Co., 57 Idaho 131, 136, 63 P.2d 664, 666 (1936). If the bringing of an action by the physician who was investigated or disciplined waived the peer review privilege of the defendants in that action, then the emphasized words above would be meaningless. In fact, to have the statute so state, it would be necessary to delete the emphasized words so that the wording would simply provide that if the physician investigated or disciplined makes claim or brings suit on account of such health care organization activity, then confidentiality and privilege shall be deemed waived by the making of such claim. To give effect to all of the words in the statute when construing it, the physician investigated or disciplined, the health care organization, and the members of such organization's staff and committees all have the right to assert the peer review privilege. By bringing the lawsuit, the physician waives his or her right to assert the privilege. The health care organization and the members of its staff and committees who are defendants in the lawsuit can then elect also to waive the privilege in order to defend the lawsuit. The statute further provides that such waiver shall only be effective in connection with the disposition or litigation of such claim, and the court shall, in its discretion, enter appropriate orders protecting, and as fully as it reasonably can do so, preserving the confidentiality of such materials and information. I.C. § 39-1392e(f). By bringing the lawsuit, the physician does not waive the privilege for purposes unconnected with the lawsuit, nor does the health care organization or the members of its staff and committees do so if they elect to rely upon privileged information in defense of the lawsuit. Finally, the statute provides that the right of the health care organization or the members of its staff or committees to use privileged information in defense of the lawsuit, shall apply whether such claim be for equitable or legal relief or for intentional or unintentional tort of any kind. I.C. § 39-1392e(f). That provision clearly shows that Idaho Code section 39-1392e(f) is not limited in its application to medical malpractice actions.