History:
L. 1965, ch. 348, § 31; L. 1976, ch. 243, § 34; L. 1976, ch. 242, § 81; L. 1986, ch. 211, § 25; L. 1986, ch. 212, § 7; Repealed, L. 1996, ch. 167, § 65; April 18.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Applied; discovery of mental facility patient records not relevant or material to case. In re Zappa, 6 Kan. App. 2d 633, 637, 631 P.2d 1245 (1981).
2. Records requested from clinic by defendant were not subject to psychotherapist-patient privilege. Ali v. Douglas Cable Communications, Ltd. Part., 890 F. Supp. 993, 995 (1995).
Ali v. Douglas Cable Commc'ns, Ltd. P'ship, 890 F. Supp. 993 (D. Kan. 1995). · cites it 3ד65-5602(a) 1 and K.S.A.1993 Supp. 59-2931(a). 2 In federal question cases with pendant state law claims, such as this case, the federal court must look to the federal common law regarding the existence of privileges.”
In the Interest of Zappa, 631 P.2d 1245 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 2דShe then invoked K.S.A. 59-2931, which prohibits the release of any records of a mental facility patient.”
K.S.A. § 59-2931(a): 1 case
Ali v. Douglas Cable Commc'ns, Ltd. P'ship, 890 F. Supp. 993 (D. Kan. 1995). “65-5602(a) 1 and K.S.A.1993 Supp. 59-2931(a). 2 In federal question cases with pendant state law claims, such as this case, the federal court must look to the federal common law regarding the existence of privileges.”
K.S.A. § 59-2931(a)(2)(A): 1 case
In the Interest of Zappa, 631 P.2d 1245 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “She then invoked K.S.A. 59-2931, which prohibits the release of any records of a mental facility patient.”
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.