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.
5 Illinois opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Illinois 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 |
|---|---|---|
Reda v. Advocate Health Caregreen2 sentences2019The court noted that “the exception was narrow and only applied to circumstances where ‘plaintiffs are invoking the mental-health therapist-patient privilege to exploit or subvert the legal process.’ ” Deprizio, 2014 IL App (1st) 123206, ¶ 31 (quoting Reda v. Advocate Health Care, 199 Ill. 2d 47, 61 (2002)). 2014Nonetheless, the court created a common law exception to strictures of the Act: "the interests of fundamental fairness and substantial justice outweigh the protections afforded the therapist-recipient relationship where plaintiff seeks to utilize those protections as a sword rather than a shield to prevent disclosure of relevant, probative, admissible, and not unduly prejudicial evidence that has the potential to fully negate the claim plaintiff asserted against defendants and absolve them of liability." (Emphasis added.) Id. ¶ 31 In Reda, the court later explained that the exception was narro | 1 | 4 |
DePrizio v. MacNeal Memorial Hospital Ass'ngreen1 sentence2019The court noted that “the exception was narrow and only applied to circumstances where ‘plaintiffs are invoking the mental-health therapist-patient privilege to exploit or subvert the legal process.’ ” Deprizio, 2014 IL App (1st) 123206, ¶ 31 (quoting Reda v. Advocate Health Care, 199 Ill. 2d 47, 61 (2002)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Illinois. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Dc v. Sa
green
2 sentences2014Nonetheless, the court created a common law exception to strictures of the Act: “the interests of fundamental fairness and substantial justice outweigh the protections afforded the therapist-recipient relationship where plaintiff seeks to utilize those protections as a sword rather than a shield to prevent disclosure of relevant, probative, admissible, and not unduly prejudicial evidence that has the potential to fully negate the claim plaintiff asserted against defendants and absolve them of liability.” (Emphasis added.) Id. ¶ 31 In Reda, the court later explained that the exception was narro 2014Nonetheless, the court created a common law exception to strictures of the Act: "the interests of fundamental fairness and substantial justice outweigh the protections afforded the therapist-recipient relationship where plaintiff seeks to utilize those protections as a sword rather than a shield to prevent disclosure of relevant, probative, admissible, and not unduly prejudicial evidence that has the potential to fully negate the claim plaintiff asserted against defendants and absolve them of liability." (Emphasis added.) Id. ¶ 31 In Reda, the court later explained that the exception was narro | 4 | 2002–2014 |
Norskog v. Pfiel
green
1 sentence2002“Indeed, the confidentiality privilege is being employed precisely as intended — to shield information which our legislature has seen fit to protect.” Norskog, 197 Ill. 2d at 83 . | 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.