Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.21515 (2026)

Confidentiality of records, data, and knowledge.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

PUBLIC HEALTH CODE


Act 368 of 1978


333.21515 Confidentiality of records, data, and knowledge.

Sec. 21515.

    The records, data, and knowledge collected for or by individuals or committees assigned a review function described in this article are confidential and shall be used only for the purposes provided in this article, shall not be public records, and shall not be available for court subpoena.

History: 1978, Act 368, Eff. Sept. 30, 1978

PopularName Notes:

Act 368
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1980–2024 · leading case: Attorney Gen. v. Bruce, 369 N.W.2d 826 (Mich. 1985).
Attorney Gen. v. Bruce, 369 N.W.2d 826 (Mich. 1985). · cites it 12× “15(20175)(5), and MCL 333.21515; MSA 14.15(21515). PROCEDURAL HISTORY In accordance with this legislation, and pursuant *162 to the specific requirements of § 20175(4), [1] on December 14, 1981, defendant Berrien General Hospital notified the Board of Medicine that it had…”
Dorris v. Detroit Osteopathic Hosp. Corp., 594 N.W.2d 455 (Mich. 1999). · cites it 4× “Section 20175(8) provides: The records, data, and knowledge collected for or by individuals or committees assigned a professional review function in a health facility or agency are confidential, shall be used only for the purposes provided in this article, are not public…”
Feyz v. Mercy Mem'l Hosp., 719 N.W.2d 1 (Mich. 2006). · cites it 2× “[52] MCL 333.21515, MCL 333.20175(8), and MCL 331.”
Krusac v. Covenant Med. Ctr., Inc, 865 N.W.2d 908 (Mich. 2015). · cites it 4× “20175(8) and MCL 333.21515 of the Public Health Code, MCL 333.”
Manzo v. Petrella & Petrella & Assocs., PC, 683 N.W.2d 699 (Mich. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “The statute does not provide a legislative scheme or any guidelines whatsoever governing implementation, action, or reporting requirements to any governmental agency.”
Dorsten v. Lapeer Cnty. Gen. Hosp., 88 F.R.D. 583 (E.D. Mich. 1980). · cites it 5× “§ 333.21515. 1 While Plaintiff acknowledges that M.”
Ligouri v. Wyandotte Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 655 N.W.2d 592 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “20175(8) and MCL 333.21515, the information was privileged and not subject to discovery.”
Dye v. St. John Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 584 N.W.2d 747 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “§ 333.21515; M.S.A. § 14.15(21515) provides that "[t]he records, data, and knowledge collected for or by individuals or committees assigned a review function described in this article are confidential and shall be used only for the purposes provided in this article, shall not be…”
Monty v. Warren Hosp. Corp., 366 N.W.2d 198 (Mich. 1985). · cites it 3× “15(20175)(5) and MCL 333.21515; MSA 14.15(21515). The assertion of this privilege arose in the *141 course of pretrial discovery relating to plaintiffs’ demand for the production by defendant hospital pursuant to GCR 1963, 310, of: Any and all personnel records and any records…”
Gallagher v. Detroit-Macomb Hosp. Ass'n, 431 N.W.2d 90 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “15(20175)(5) and MCL 333.21515; MSA 14.15(21515). This privilege may only be invoked for records, data and knowledge collected for or by an individual or committee assigned a review function.”
In Re Attorney Gen. for Investigative Subpoenas, 766 N.W.2d 675 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “In the course of rejecting the petitioner’s position on the basis that the peer review records were shielded by privilege, MCL 333.21515, the Supreme Court addressed the petitioner’s suggestion that the code provisions bestowing broad investigative authority on the former…”
Bishop v. St John Hosp., 364 N.W.2d 290 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “The defendant originally withheld the report from the plaintiffs, claiming a privilege pursuant to MCL 333.21515; MSA 14.15(21515). Nonetheless, during his cross-examination of three of the defendant's witnesses, plaintiffs' counsel made various inquiries regarding the report,…”
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.