K.S.A. » Chapter 65
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 65-4925 (2026)

Reports, records and proceedings confidential and privileged; licensing agency disciplinary proceedings

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

65-4925. Reports, records and proceedings confidential and privileged; licensing agency disciplinary proceedings. (a) The reports and records made pursuant to K.S.A. 65-4923 or 65-4924, and amendments thereto, shall be confidential and privileged, including:

(1) Reports and records of executive or review committees of medical care facilities or of a professional society or organization;

(2) reports and records of the chief of the medical staff, chief administrative officer or risk manager of a medical care facility;

(3) reports and records of any state licensing agency or impaired provider committee of a professional society or organization; and

(4) reports made pursuant to this act to or by a medical care facility risk manager, any committee, the board of directors, administrative officer or any consultant.

Such reports and records shall not be subject to discovery, subpoena or other means of legal compulsion for their release to any person or entity and shall not be admissible in any civil or administrative action other than a disciplinary proceeding by the appropriate state licensing agency.

(b) No person in attendance at any meeting of an executive or review committee of a medical care facility or of a professional society or organization while such committee is engaged in the duties imposed by K.S.A. 65-4923 shall be compelled to testify in any civil, criminal or administrative action, other than a disciplinary proceeding by the appropriate licensing agency, as to any committee discussions or proceedings.

(c) No person in attendance at any meeting of an impaired provider committee shall be required to testify, nor shall the testimony of such person be admitted into evidence, in any civil, criminal or administrative action, other than a disciplinary proceeding by the appropriate state licensing agency, as to any committee discussions or proceedings.

(d) Any person or committee performing any duty pursuant to this act shall be designated a peer review committee or officer pursuant to K.S.A. 65-4915 and amendments thereto.

(e) A licensing agency in conducting a disciplinary proceeding in which admission of any peer review committee report, record or testimony is proposed shall hold the hearing in closed session when any such report, record or testimony is disclosed. Unless otherwise provided by law, a licensing agency conducting a disciplinary proceeding may close only that portion of the hearing in which disclosure of a report or record privileged under this section is proposed. In closing a portion of a hearing as provided by this section, the presiding officer may exclude any person from the hearing location except the licensee, the licensee's attorney, the agency's attorney, the witness, the court reporter and appropriate staff support for either counsel. The licensing agency shall make the portions of the agency record in which such report or record is disclosed subject to a protective order prohibiting further disclosure of such report or record. Such report or record shall not be subject to discovery, subpoena or other means of legal compulsion for their release to any person or entity. No person in attendance at a closed portion of a disciplinary proceeding shall at a subsequent civil, criminal or administrative hearing, be required to testify regarding the existence or content of a report or record privileged under this section which was disclosed in a closed portion of a hearing, nor shall such testimony be admitted into evidence in any subsequent civil, criminal or administrative hearing. A licensing agency conducting a disciplinary proceeding may review peer review committee records, testimony or reports but must prove its findings with independently obtained testimony or records which shall be presented as part of the disciplinary proceeding in open meeting of the licensing agency. Offering such testimony or records in an open public hearing shall not be deemed a waiver of the peer review privilege relating to any peer review committee testimony, records or report.

History: L. 1986, ch. 229, § 6; L. 1987, ch. 176, § 11; L. 1997, ch. 149, § 2; May 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1987–2025 · leading case: Kloster v. Hancock (In Re Rockhill Pain Specialists, P.A.), 412 P.3d 1008 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kloster v. Hancock (In Re Rockhill Pain Specialists, P.A.), 412 P.3d 1008 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 17× “On appeal, Hancock argues that the district court misapplied the statutory privilege in K.S.A. 65-4925, which provides that reports and records of state licensing agencies are confidential, by admitting evidence that two state agencies had cleared Kloster of any wrongdoing.”
Adams v. St. Francis Reg'l Med. Ctr., 955 P.2d 1169 (Kan. 1998). · cites it 16× “65-4923 and K.S.A. 65-4925. K.S.A. 1997 Supp. 65-1135 was a 1993 addition to the Kansas Nurse Practice Act.”
Sonnino v. Univ. of Kansas Hosp. Auth., 220 F.R.D. 633 (D. Kan. 2004). · cites it 6× “Topeka State Hospital, 38 Magistrate Judge Rushfelt addressed the applicability of the risk management privilege set forth in K.S.A. 65-4925 in a Title VII sexual harassment action.”
Hill v. Sandhu, 129 F.R.D. 548 (D. Kan. 1990). · cites it 4× “Kan.Stat.Ann. § 65-4925 (Supp.1988). Initially, plaintiff argues that the peer review privilege statute is substantive in nature and therefore should not be applied retrospectively.”
Turnbull v. Topeka State Hosp., 185 F.R.D. 645 (D. Kan. 1999). · cites it 3× “The principal dispute upon this motion involves the applicability of privileges provided by Kansas statute K.S.A. 65-4925. During depositions defense counsel instructed Mr.”
Lloyd v. Quorum Health Resources, L.L.C., 77 P.3d 993 (Kan. Ct. App. 2003). “” All proceedings with respect to “reportable incidents” are confidential and privileged under K.S.A. 65-4925. The Newman County Memorial medical staff bylaws provide in relevant part: “Peer Review Officers “In recognition of the obligation of each member of the Staff to assist…”
Hinsdale v. City of Liberal, Kansas, 961 F. Supp. 1490 (D. Kan. 1997). “The language of this statute is very different from the risk management statute, which provides in K.S.A. 65-4925(a) that certain records and reports shall be “confidential and privileged” and not subject to discovery or other means of legal compulsion and shall not be…”
Hinsdale v. City of Liberal, Kan., 981 F. Supp. 1378 (D. Kan. 1997). “”); K.S.A. 65-4925 (reports and records made pursuant to the risk management statutes are “confidential and privileged”: “Such reports and records shall not be subject to discovery, subpoena or other means of legal compulsion for their release to any person or entity and shall…”
Porter v. Snyder, 115 F.R.D. 77 (D. Kan. 1987). “The issue raised by the hospital’s motion is whether an “incident report” is confidential and nondiscoverable pursuant to K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 65-4925(a). On March 23, 1987, the court took up argument on the motion, having reviewed the parties’ briefs.”
Balk v. Dunlap, 163 F.R.D. 360 (D. Kan. 1995). “K.S.A. 65-4925 similarly protects risk management reports and records from discovery and subpoena: *362 Reports, records and proceedings confidential and privileged, (a) The reports and records made pursuant to K.”
Hennessey v. Univ. of Kansas Hosp. Auth. (D. Kan. 2024). · cites it 3× “16 The Court has diversity jurisdiction in this negligent supervision case. Therefore, Kansas law defines the contours of the privileges asserted.”
Byrnes v. St. Catherine Hosp. (D. Kan. 2023). · cites it 2× “65-4915 and/or K.S.A. 65-4925, expressly assert, preserve, and do not waive those privileges already asserted with respect to the above-referenced communications”).”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 65-4925(a) — 6 cases
Adams v. St. Francis Reg'l Med. Ctr., 955 P.2d 1169 (Kan. 1998). “65-4923 and K.S.A. 65-4925. K.S.A. 1997 Supp. 65-1135 was a 1993 addition to the Kansas Nurse Practice Act.”
Kloster v. Hancock (In Re Rockhill Pain Specialists, P.A.), 412 P.3d 1008 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017). “On appeal, Hancock argues that the district court misapplied the statutory privilege in K.S.A. 65-4925, which provides that reports and records of state licensing agencies are confidential, by admitting evidence that two state agencies had cleared Kloster of any wrongdoing.”
Sonnino v. Univ. of Kansas Hosp. Auth., 220 F.R.D. 633 (D. Kan. 2004). “Topeka State Hospital, 38 Magistrate Judge Rushfelt addressed the applicability of the risk management privilege set forth in K.S.A. 65-4925 in a Title VII sexual harassment action.”
Hinsdale v. City of Liberal, Kansas, 961 F. Supp. 1490 (D. Kan. 1997). “The language of this statute is very different from the risk management statute, which provides in K.S.A. 65-4925(a) that certain records and reports shall be “confidential and privileged” and not subject to discovery or other means of legal compulsion and shall not be…”
Porter v. Snyder, 115 F.R.D. 77 (D. Kan. 1987). “The issue raised by the hospital’s motion is whether an “incident report” is confidential and nondiscoverable pursuant to K.S.A. 1986 Supp. 65-4925(a). On March 23, 1987, the court took up argument on the motion, having reviewed the parties’ briefs.”
— K.S.A. § 65-4925(a)(3) — 1 case
Kloster v. Hancock (In Re Rockhill Pain Specialists, P.A.), 412 P.3d 1008 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017). “On appeal, Hancock argues that the district court misapplied the statutory privilege in K.S.A. 65-4925, which provides that reports and records of state licensing agencies are confidential, by admitting evidence that two state agencies had cleared Kloster of any wrongdoing.”
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.