Court Opinion

ID: 9772983
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 17:34:24.59864+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:49.570017
License: Public Domain

WELLIVER, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. The minutes and records of the, peer review committee should not be disclosed for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in State ex rel. Chandra v. Sprinkle, Mo., 678 S.W.2d 804, decided this date.
Records of non-party patients should remain privileged from disclosure under the physician-patient privilege. There were unique and compelling reasons for ordering a limited form of disclosure of the time-work records of the law firm in State ex rel. Friedman v. Provaznik, 668 S.W.2d 76 (Mo. banc 1984). The case files of clients, protected by the attorney-client privilege, were not directly involved. That case should be limited to its facts and its facts *816alone. It is not authority for invading the attorney-client privilege or the physician-patient privilege.
I am sympathetic with all victims of malpractice, medical or legal, but all of the malpractice suits in the world together cannot justify invading the medical or legal file of a single Missouri citizen.