Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Maureen STOYKA, Petitioner, v. Mary GRECZ; Michael Grecz; The Tides at Bridgeside Square Condominium Association, Inc., a Florida corporation; and Dag M. Hansson, Respondents.
Petitioner, the defendant in a pending slip and fall action, seeks a writ of certiorari to quash a trial court's order requiring that she disclose medical and pharmaceutical information. We grant the petition because petitioner is correct that discovery of this private and confidential medical information is protected and not permitted in this action. See Brooks v. Brooks, 239 So.3d 758, 761 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (“The records of husband's treating physician, the medical facility, and the pharmacy fall within the ambit of the statutory privilege, and that privilege is only waived under the extreme circumstances described in the case law.”); Brown v. Montanez, 90 So.3d 982, 987 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (quashing order requiring production of defendant motorist's post-accident substance abuse treatment records).
In the case below, the plaintiff slipped in a condominium's elevator. Plaintiff alleges that petitioner caused her to slip and fall when petitioner returned from a restaurant, spilled her beverage in the elevator, and failed to clean up the spill or notify the building staff.
The party seeking the privileged documents has the burden to prove that an exception applies. Brown, 90 So.3d at 986. Plaintiff failed to meet that burden since petitioner has not placed her medical condition at issue, and the medical information is irrelevant to the question of whether petitioner was negligent. See id. at 986-88. Accordingly, we grant the petition and quash the trial court's order.
Petition granted, order quashed.
Per Curiam.
May, Damoorgian and Ciklin, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 4D19-1607
Decided: October 02, 2019
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)