Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-2235
Doctor and patient
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official)
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
In a civil action a physician or surgeon shall not, without the consent of his patient, or the conservator or guardian of the patient, be examined as to any communication made by his patient with reference to any physical or mental disease or disorder or supposed physical or mental disease or disorder or as to any such knowledge obtained by personal examination of the patient.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 46
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1966–2024 · leading case: Duquette v. Superior Court
Duquette v. Superior Court (1989)
“See A.R.S. § 12-2235 (1982). [4] The Arizona statute precludes a physician from being examined about any communications made by the patient concerning his condition or any knowledge of the condition obtained through personal examination of the patient without the consent of the…”
Tucson Medical Center Incorporated v. Rowles (1974)
“Trisler would be prohibited by A.R.S. § 12-2235 from testifying as to this data, and that TMC, as the custodian of these records, is therefore under a duty not to disclose this information.”
State v. Wilson (2001)
“] § 12-2235, information obtained by any physician or surgeon examining or treating an injured person shall not be considered a privileged communication, if such information is requested by interested parties for a proper understanding of the case and a determination of the…”
Tucson Medical Center, Incorporated v. Misevch (1976)
“subject to subpoena but shall be delivered by the custodian only to the judge in a judicial proceeding, who shall review such information.”
Carondelet Health Network v. Miller (2009)
“The respondent judge granted Mary’s motion, ordered Carondelet to disclose the identifying information under seal, and directed counsel not to reveal the patient’s name to anyone else “without prior permission from the Court or express, written permission by the patient.”
State v. Miles (2005)
“In interpreting A.R.S. § 12-2235, the civil counterpart to § 13-4062(4), 5 this court ruled that “hospital records are covered by the physician-patient privilege” and that a hospital must “assert this privilege when neither the *480 patient nor his physician are parties to the…”
State v. Santeyan (1983)
“The statute providing for the doctor-patient privilege in civil actions, A.R.S. § 12-2235, 1 has not been limited to oral communications.”
State v. Mincey (1984)
“• However, neither the current civil privilege (A.R.S. § 12-2235) nor the current criminal privilege (A.”
Phoenix Children's Hospital, Inc. v. Grant (2011)
“See A.R.S. § 12-2235 (“In a civil action a physician or surgeon shall not .”
Ornelas v. Fry (1986)
“Fry timely asserted the physician/patient privilege pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-2235 with respect to his alcoholism treatment records at St.”
Rasor v. Northwest Hospital, LLC Dba Northwest Medical Center (2016)
“See A.R.S. §§ 12-2235, 12-2294.01. Notwithstanding these protections, redacted non-party medical records may still be subject to discovery if the records are relevant and certain precautions are taken to protect patient identities.”
Catrone v. Miles (2007)
“1986) (holding that plaintiffs may not compel discovery of a doctor’s alcoholism treatment records pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-2235 (2003) (physician-patient privilege), in negligence action against doctor); Bain v.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.