Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
21 Kentucky opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2024 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kentucky courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Barrosogreen2 sentences2024Our Supreme Court has held that “the Compulsory Process Clause affords a criminal defendant the right to obtain and present exculpatory evidence, including impeachment evidence, in the possession of a third party that would otherwise be subject to the psychotherapist-patient privilege.” Commonwealth v. Barroso, 122 S.W.3d 554, 561 (Ky. 2003). 2024In Barroso, this Court concluded that “the [Sixth Amendment’s] Compulsory Process Clause affords a criminal defendant the right to obtain and present exculpatory evidence, including impeachment evidence, in the possession of a third party that would otherwise be subject to the psychotherapist-patient privilege.” 122 S.W.3d at 562 . | 6 | 16 |
Hodge v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2016Hodge v. Commonwealth, 17 S.W.3d 824, 844 (Ky.2000); see also Barroso, 122 S.W.3d at 561 (“[W]e conclude that the Compulsory Process Clause affords a criminal- defendant the right to obtain and present exculpatory evidence, including impeachment evidence, in the possession of a third party that would otherwise be subject to the psychotherapist-patient privilege.”). 2003Rather, as in Eldred, supra, at 701-02 , and Hodge v. Commonwealth, Ky., 17 S.W.3d 824, 843-44 (2000), the evidence sought here pertains to the psychotherapy of a witness who has not waived the privilege and falls squarely within its parameters. | 2 | 2 |
Jaffee v. Redmondgreen2 sentences2003See Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1, 17-18 , 116 S.Ct. 1923, 1932 , 135 L.Ed.2d 337 (1996) (“Making the promise of confidentiality contingent upon a trial judge’s later evaluation of the relative importance of the patient’s interest in privacy and the evidentiary need for disclosure would eviscerate the effectiveness of the privilege.”). 1 Compare KRE 506 (counsel- or-client privilege) and CR 26.02(3)(a) (work product privilege) which are “qualified” privileges. 2003See Jaffee v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1, 17-18 , 116 S.Ct. 1923, 1932 , 135 L.Ed.2d 337 (1996) (“Making the promise of confidentiality contingent upon a trial judge’s later evaluation of the relative importance of the patient’s interest in privacy and the evidentiary need for disclosure would eviscerate the effectiveness of the privilege.”). 1 Compare KRE 506 (counsel- or-client privilege) and CR 26.02(3)(a) (work product privilege) which are “qualified” privileges. | 1 | 2 |
Dunn v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2023While the psychotherapist-patient privilege does not provide such an exception, the Kentucky Supreme Court nonetheless “held [in Barroso], that a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to discover exculpatory evidence prevails over the psychotherapist-patient privilege, and so the parties must be given access to exculpatory information in a witness’s psychotherapy records.” Dunn v. Commonwealth, 360 S.W.3d 751, 767 (Ky. 2012). -23- But to preclude “fishing expeditions” into psychotherapy records, Barroso required a two-step process before evidence from the records may be turned over to the | 1 | 1 |
COM., CABINET FOR HEALTH v. Bartlettgreen1 sentence2023“First, the defendant must produce ‘evidence sufficient to establish a reasonable belief that the records contain exculpatory evidence.’ Second, the trial court must conduct an in camera review to determine whether or not the records sought actually do contain such evidence.” Commonwealth, Cabinet for Health and Family Services v. Bartlett, 311 S.W.3d 224, 227 (Ky. 2010) (quoting Barroso, 122 S.W.3d at 563-64 ) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Kinsella v. Kinsellagreen2 sentences2017New Jersey’s Supreme Court, in its critique of Atwood , also called the waiver "automatic,” In Kinsella v. Kinsella, 150 N.J. 276 , 696 A.2d 556 (1997), the court first noted its “review of the law of other jurisdictions reveals that most courts do not pierce the psychotherapist-patient privilege automatically in disputes over the best interests of the child, but may require disclosure only after careful balancing of the policies in favor of the privilege with the need for disclosure in the specific case before the court.” Id. at 581 (emphasis added). 2017New Jersey’s Supreme Court, in its critique of Atwood , also called the waiver "automatic,” In Kinsella v. Kinsella, 150 N.J. 276 , 696 A.2d 556 (1997), the court first noted its “review of the law of other jurisdictions reveals that most courts do not pierce the psychotherapist-patient privilege automatically in disputes over the best interests of the child, but may require disclosure only after careful balancing of the policies in favor of the privilege with the need for disclosure in the specific case before the court.” Id. at 581 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Deborah L. Schoffstall v. William Henderson, Agent U.S. Postal Servicegreen1 sentence2011See Doe v. Oberweis Dairy, 456 F.3d 704, 718 (7th Cir.2006); Schoffstall v. Henderson, 223 F.3d 818, 823 (8th Cir. 2000); Maynard v. City of San Jose, 37 F.3d 1396 (9th Cir.1994); Dixon v. City of Lawton, 898 F.2d 1443 (10th Cir.1990). | 1 | 1 |
Jane Doe, and Jane Roe and Jane Roe 2, Proposed-Intervenors-Appellants v. Oberweis Dairygreen1 sentence2011See Doe v. Oberweis Dairy, 456 F.3d 704, 718 (7th Cir.2006); Schoffstall v. Henderson, 223 F.3d 818, 823 (8th Cir. 2000); Maynard v. City of San Jose, 37 F.3d 1396 (9th Cir.1994); Dixon v. City of Lawton, 898 F.2d 1443 (10th Cir.1990). | 1 | 1 |
Mullins v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2004In fact, the Court of Appeals, relying on this Court's decision in Mullins v. Commonwealth, Ky., 956 S.W.2d 210, 211 (1997), held that KRS 620.050 abrogates the professional-client/patient privilege if it is used in the case of dependent, neglected or abused children. 2004In fact, the Court of Appeals, relying on this Court’s decision in Mullins v. Commonwealth, Ky., 956 S.W.2d 210, 211 (1997), held that KRS 620.050 abrogates the professional-client/patient privilege if it is used in the case of dependent, neglected or abused children. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Packgreen2 sentences2003People v. Pack, 201 Cal.App.3d 679 , 248 Cal.Rptr. 240, 244 (1988) (citations omitted), overruled on other grounds by People v. Hammon, supra, at 990. 2003People v. Pack, 201 Cal.App.3d 679 , 248 Cal.Rptr. 240, 244 (1988) (citations omitted), overruled on other grounds by People v. Hammon, supra, at 990. | 1 | 1 |
McKinney v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2003We note at the outset that this is not a case where the witness has voluntarily waived the psychotherapist-patient privilege, as in McKinney v. Commonwealth, Ky., 60 S.W.3d 499, 506-07 (2001), or where a prosecutor or grand jury has attempted to gain access to records of a criminal defendant’s own psychotherapy, as in Stidham v. Clark, Ky., 74 S.W.3d 719 (2002), or where the evidence sought falls either outside the privilege or within an exception specified in the rule, itself, as in Myers v. Commonwealth, Ky., 87 S.W.3d 243 (2002). | 1 | 1 |
Massey v. Georgiagreen2 sentences2002See, e.g., Massey v. State, 226 Ga. 703 , 177 S.E.2d 79, 81 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 964 , 91 S.Ct. 984 , 28 L.Ed.2d 248 (1971); State v. Taylor, 304 N.C. 249 , 283 S.E.2d 761, 776 (1981), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1213 , 103 S.Ct. 3552 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1398 (1983); 81 Am.Jur.2d, Witnesses § 445 (Lawyers Coop.1992). 2002See, e.g., Massey v. State, 226 Ga. 703 , 177 S.E.2d 79, 81 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 964 , 91 S.Ct. 984 , 28 L.Ed.2d 248 (1971); State v. Taylor, 304 N.C. 249 , 283 S.E.2d 761, 776 (1981), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1213 , 103 S.Ct. 3552 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1398 (1983); 81 Am.Jur.2d, Witnesses § 445 (Lawyers Coop.1992). | 1 | 1 |
Massey v. Stategreen2 sentences2002See, e.g., Massey v. State, 226 Ga. 703 , 177 S.E.2d 79, 81 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 964 , 91 S.Ct. 984 , 28 L.Ed.2d 248 (1971); State v. Taylor, 304 N.C. 249 , 283 S.E.2d 761, 776 (1981), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1213 , 103 S.Ct. 3552 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1398 (1983); 81 Am.Jur.2d, Witnesses § 445 (Lawyers Coop.1992). 2002See, e.g., Massey v. State, 226 Ga. 703 , 177 S.E.2d 79, 81 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 964 , 91 S.Ct. 984 , 28 L.Ed.2d 248 (1971); State v. Taylor, 304 N.C. 249 , 283 S.E.2d 761, 776 (1981), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1213 , 103 S.Ct. 3552 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1398 (1983); 81 Am.Jur.2d, Witnesses § 445 (Lawyers Coop.1992). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Taylorgreen2 sentences2002See, e.g., Massey v. State, 226 Ga. 703 , 177 S.E.2d 79, 81 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 964 , 91 S.Ct. 984 , 28 L.Ed.2d 248 (1971); State v. Taylor, 304 N.C. 249 , 283 S.E.2d 761, 776 (1981), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1213 , 103 S.Ct. 3552 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1398 (1983); 81 Am.Jur.2d, Witnesses § 445 (Lawyers Coop.1992). 2002See, e.g., Massey v. State, 226 Ga. 703 , 177 S.E.2d 79, 81 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 964 , 91 S.Ct. 984 , 28 L.Ed.2d 248 (1971); State v. Taylor, 304 N.C. 249 , 283 S.E.2d 761, 776 (1981), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1213 , 103 S.Ct. 3552 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1398 (1983); 81 Am.Jur.2d, Witnesses § 445 (Lawyers Coop.1992). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Eldred v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences2005This Court held in Barroso , as we previously did in Eldred v. Commonwealth, 906 S.W.2d 694 (Ky.1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1154 , 116 S.Ct. 1034 , 134 L.Ed.2d 111 (1996), that “[i]f the psychotherapy records of a crucial prosecution witness contain evidence probative of the witness’s ability to recall, comprehend, and accurately relate the subject matter of the testimony, the defendant’s right to compulsory process must prevail over the witness’s psychotherapist-patient privilege.” Barroso, supra, at 563 . 2003Rather, as in Eldred, supra, at 701-02 , and Hodge v. Commonwealth, Ky., 17 S.W.3d 824, 843-44 (2000), the evidence sought here pertains to the psychotherapy of a witness who has not waived the privilege and falls squarely within its parameters. | 2 | 2003–2005 |
Bond v. Bond
green
1 sentence2017First, we clarified our own holding within the body of Bond’s majority opinion. 12 Our holding, in fact, was that “the trial court committed reversible error when it precluded [the child’s psychiatrist’s] testimony based upon the privilege asserted by [the custodial parent and held] that the custodial parent may not invoke the psychotherapist-patient privilege for a child in custody litigation....” Id. (emphasis added). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
cluster 680026
green
1 sentence2011See Doe v. Oberweis Dairy, 456 F.3d 704, 718 (7th Cir.2006); Schoffstall v. Henderson, 223 F.3d 818, 823 (8th Cir. 2000); Maynard v. City of San Jose, 37 F.3d 1396 (9th Cir.1994); Dixon v. City of Lawton, 898 F.2d 1443 (10th Cir.1990). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Dixon v. City of Lawton, Oklahoma
green
1 sentence2011See Doe v. Oberweis Dairy, 456 F.3d 704, 718 (7th Cir.2006); Schoffstall v. Henderson, 223 F.3d 818, 823 (8th Cir. 2000); Maynard v. City of San Jose, 37 F.3d 1396 (9th Cir.1994); Dixon v. City of Lawton, 898 F.2d 1443 (10th Cir.1990). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Quick v. National Auto Credit, Inc.
green
2 sentences2005This Court held in Barroso , as we previously did in Eldred v. Commonwealth, 906 S.W.2d 694 (Ky.1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1154 , 116 S.Ct. 1034 , 134 L.Ed.2d 111 (1996), that “[i]f the psychotherapy records of a crucial prosecution witness contain evidence probative of the witness’s ability to recall, comprehend, and accurately relate the subject matter of the testimony, the defendant’s right to compulsory process must prevail over the witness’s psychotherapist-patient privilege.” Barroso, supra, at 563 . 2005This Court held in Barroso , as we previously did in Eldred v. Commonwealth, 906 S.W.2d 694 (Ky.1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1154 , 116 S.Ct. 1034 , 134 L.Ed.2d 111 (1996), that “[i]f the psychotherapy records of a crucial prosecution witness contain evidence probative of the witness’s ability to recall, comprehend, and accurately relate the subject matter of the testimony, the defendant’s right to compulsory process must prevail over the witness’s psychotherapist-patient privilege.” Barroso, supra, at 563 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
General Public Utilities Corp. v. Dodson
green
1 sentence2005This Court held in Barroso , as we previously did in Eldred v. Commonwealth, 906 S.W.2d 694 (Ky.1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1154 , 116 S.Ct. 1034 , 134 L.Ed.2d 111 (1996), that “[i]f the psychotherapy records of a crucial prosecution witness contain evidence probative of the witness’s ability to recall, comprehend, and accurately relate the subject matter of the testimony, the defendant’s right to compulsory process must prevail over the witness’s psychotherapist-patient privilege.” Barroso, supra, at 563 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Stidham v. Clark
green
1 sentence2003We note at the outset that this is not a case where the witness has voluntarily waived the psychotherapist-patient privilege, as in McKinney v. Commonwealth, Ky., 60 S.W.3d 499, 506-07 (2001), or where a prosecutor or grand jury has attempted to gain access to records of a criminal defendant’s own psychotherapy, as in Stidham v. Clark, Ky., 74 S.W.3d 719 (2002), or where the evidence sought falls either outside the privilege or within an exception specified in the rule, itself, as in Myers v. Commonwealth, Ky., 87 S.W.3d 243 (2002). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Myers v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2003We note at the outset that this is not a case where the witness has voluntarily waived the psychotherapist-patient privilege, as in McKinney v. Commonwealth, Ky., 60 S.W.3d 499, 506-07 (2001), or where a prosecutor or grand jury has attempted to gain access to records of a criminal defendant’s own psychotherapy, as in Stidham v. Clark, Ky., 74 S.W.3d 719 (2002), or where the evidence sought falls either outside the privilege or within an exception specified in the rule, itself, as in Myers v. Commonwealth, Ky., 87 S.W.3d 243 (2002). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
United States v. Nixon
green
2 sentences2003In United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 708 , 94 S.Ct. 3090 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1974), the special prosecutor sought evidence, ie., secretly recorded conversations of the defendants, in the possession of a third party, the President of the United States. 2003In United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683, 708 , 94 S.Ct. 3090 , 41 L.Ed.2d 1039 (1974), the special prosecutor sought evidence, ie., secretly recorded conversations of the defendants, in the possession of a third party, the President of the United States. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
United States v. Zolin
green
2 sentences2002Zolin noted that the "prima facie case" standard established in Clark had caused "confusion" and been subjected to criticism by legal scholars, id. at 563 n.7, 109 S.Ct. at 2626 , then concluded that "[t]he quantum of proof needed to establish admissibility was then, and remains, subject to question." Id. 2002Zolin noted that the "prima facie case" standard established in Clark had caused "confusion" and been subjected to criticism by legal scholars, id. at 563 n.7, 109 S.Ct. at 2626 , then concluded that "[t]he quantum of proof needed to establish admissibility was then, and remains, subject to question." Id. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Amick v. United States
green
1 sentence2002See, e.g., Massey v. State, 226 Ga. 703 , 177 S.E.2d 79, 81 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 964 , 91 S.Ct. 984 , 28 L.Ed.2d 248 (1971); State v. Taylor, 304 N.C. 249 , 283 S.E.2d 761, 776 (1981), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1213 , 103 S.Ct. 3552 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1398 (1983); 81 Am.Jur.2d, Witnesses § 445 (Lawyers Coop.1992). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Gates v. Zant
green
1 sentence2002See, e.g., Massey v. State, 226 Ga. 703 , 177 S.E.2d 79, 81 (1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 964 , 91 S.Ct. 984 , 28 L.Ed.2d 248 (1971); State v. Taylor, 304 N.C. 249 , 283 S.E.2d 761, 776 (1981), cert. denied, 463 U.S. 1213 , 103 S.Ct. 3552 , 77 L.Ed.2d 1398 (1983); 81 Am.Jur.2d, Witnesses § 445 (Lawyers Coop.1992). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.