(a) A court order under the regulations in this part may authorize disclosure of confidential communications made by a patient to a part 2 program in the course of diagnosis, treatment, or referral for treatment only if:
(1) The disclosure is necessary to protect against an existing threat to life or of serious bodily injury, including circumstances which constitute suspected child abuse and neglect and verbal threats against third parties;
(2) The disclosure is necessary in connection with investigation or prosecution of an extremely serious crime, such as one which directly threatens loss of life or serious bodily injury, including homicide, rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, or child abuse and neglect; or
(3) The disclosure is in connection with a civil, criminal, administrative, or legislative proceeding in which the patient offers testimony or other evidence pertaining to the content of the confidential communications.
(b) [Reserved]
[82 FR 6115, Jan. 18, 2017, as amended at 85 FR 80632, Dec. 14, 2020; 89 FR 12629, Feb. 16, 2024]
Notes of Decisions
In re Adoption (And (2018)
massappct · cites it 3×
“See 42 C.F.R. § 2.63 (1975). After the decision in Whyte , the regulation was amended to allow for the court-ordered disclosure of "confidential communications" as well.”
Adoption of Virgil. (2018)
massappct · cites it 2×
“8 Title 42 C.F.R. § 2.63 (1987) provides in relevant part: "(a) A court order under these regulations may authorize the disclosure of confidential communications made by a patient to a .”
In re Marvin M. (1998)
connappct · cites it 5×
“1995) (concluding that 42 C.F.R. §§ 2.63 and 2.64 should be read together).”
In re Romance M. (1993)
connappct · cites it 2×
“The trial court determined that there was good cause for disclosure of the treatment information and that it was highly relevant to the issue of the respondent’s mental health, an issue that the respondent herself raised when she testified that she was capable of responsibly…”
In re B.S. (1995)
vt · cites it 2×
“” 42 C.F.R. § 2.63 (a). These restrictions apply both to confidential communications found in the CDAS records on appellant, as well as confidential communications to which the CDAS counselor might testify.”
Fannon v. Johnston (2000)
mied · cites it 3×
“42 C.F.R. § 2.63 (a)(3). Therefore, if the information sought contains “confidential communications,” plaintiff must satisfy both the “good cause” requirements of § 290dd-2(b)(2)(C) and the requirements of Subdivision (a)(3).”
People v. Jimenez (2008)
coloctapp
“Legality of the Court's Disclosure Order Defendant contends that even if some or all of the information in question fell within the exception for reports of incidents of suspected child abuse, the district court erred in ordering that it should be disclosed to and could be used…”
JANE H. v. Rothe (1992)
nd · cites it 2×
“42 CFR § 2.63 (a)(3). Under this specific regulation, “confidential communications made by a patient” while seeking and receiving drug abuse treatment cannot be disclosed even though the court has found “good cause” for disclosure of other information in the patient’s records,…”
Bowling v. State (2011)
ga
“” 42 CFR § 2.63 (a) (2). Bowling’s reliance on Georgia statutes is equally unavailing.”
United States v. Ray L. Corona (1988)
ca11
“The trial court limited the number of pages disclosed in compliance with 42 C.F.R. § 2.63 (a) which, as of October 1986, required that disclosure be limited to objective data.”
— 42 C.F.R. § 2.63(a) — 2 cases
— 42 C.F.R. § 2.63(a)(1) — 2 cases
— 42 C.F.R. § 2.63(a)(3) — 3 cases
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.