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.
6 New York opinions name it 5 courts 1984–2007 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York 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 |
|---|---|---|
PEOPLE EX REL. DEPT. OF PROF. REG. v. Manosgreen2 sentences2007Under the common law of Illinois there was no privilege attaching to communications between a physician and a patient and the privilege is entirely a creation of legislation (Manos, 202 111 2d at 568, 782 NE2d at 241). 2007Footnote 6: 735 Illinois Compiled Statutes Annotated § 5/8-802 provides, in pertinent part, that "[n]o physician or surgeon shall be permitted to disclose any information he or she may have acquired in attending any patient in a professional character, necessary to enable him or her professionally to serve the patient." Footnote 7: Under the common law of Illinois there was no privilege attaching to communications between a physician and a patient and the privilege is entirely a creation of legislation ( Manos , 202 Ill 2d at 568, 782 NE2d at 241). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ferretti v. Town of Greenburgh
green
1 sentence2007Tewksbury, 273 AD2d 376 ; Matter of E.K., 235 AD2d 540 ; Ferretti, 191 AD2d 608 ). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
E. K. v. State
green
1 sentence2007Tewksbury, 273 AD2d 376 ; Matter of E.K., 235 AD2d 540 ; Ferretti, 191 AD2d 608 ). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Tewksbury v. State
green
1 sentence2007Tewksbury, 273 AD2d 376 ; Matter of E.K., 235 AD2d 540 ; Ferretti, 191 AD2d 608 ). | 1 | 2007–2007 |
In re Barbara W.
neutral
1 sentence2002(Matter of Barbara W., 142 Misc 2d 542 [1988].) However, that court ruled that the psychiatric hospital must establish, by clear and convincing proof, the need for involuntary treatment and care without any limitation as to whether or not the request for a hearing was incidental to the initial admission. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Workman v. Boylan Buick, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence1993While it is the patient who holds the privilege and, therefore, only the patient who may waive it (Dillenbeck v Hess, 73 NY2d, supra, at 289; Prink v Rockefeller Ctr., 48 NY2d 309, 314 ; Richardson, Evidence § 434 [Prince 10th ed]), there is no basis in logic to differentiate between a situation where the patient conveys the information directly to the unconnected third party and a situation, as here, where the patient authorizes his or her physician to convey such information (see, Workman v Boylan Buick, 36 AD2d 978 ; In re Von Bulow, supra, at 100). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Prink v. Rockefeller Center, Inc.
green
1 sentence1993While it is the patient who holds the privilege and, therefore, only the patient who may waive it (Dillenbeck v Hess, 73 NY2d, supra, at 289; Prink v Rockefeller Ctr., 48 NY2d 309, 314 ; Richardson, Evidence § 434 [Prince 10th ed]), there is no basis in logic to differentiate between a situation where the patient conveys the information directly to the unconnected third party and a situation, as here, where the patient authorizes his or her physician to convey such information (see, Workman v Boylan Buick, 36 AD2d 978 ; In re Von Bulow, supra, at 100). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
In re Allen
neutral
1 sentence1984The courts in New York are in conflict as to the applicability of the physician-patient privilege in incompetency or conservatorship proceedings (see Matter of Allen [Mauceli], 24 Misc 2d 763 [holding the privilege inapplicable]; contra Matter of Gates, 170 App Div 921 ; Matter of J. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Willett v. Devoy
yellow
1 sentence1984The courts in New York are in conflict as to the applicability of the physician-patient privilege in incompetency or conservatorship proceedings (see Matter of Allen [Mauceli], 24 Misc 2d 763 [holding the privilege inapplicable]; contra Matter of Gates, 170 App Div 921 ; Matter of J. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.