Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (2026)

Communications privileged; exception

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Codes, 1906, § 3695; Hemingway's 1917, § 6380; 1930, § 1536; 1942, § 1697; Laws, 1944, ch. 315; Laws, 1968, ch. 441, § 4; Laws, 1976, ch. 347; Laws, 1979, ch. 408; Laws, 1982, ch. 407; Laws, 1983, ch. 327; Laws, 1987, ch. 500, § 2; Laws, 1988, ch. 557, § 3, eff. 7/1/1988.

Amended by Laws, 2023, ch. 337, SB 2797,§ 6, eff. 7/1/2023.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2022 · leading case: Franklin Collection Serv., Inc. v. Kyle, 955 So. 2d 284 (Miss. 2007).
Franklin Collection Serv., Inc. v. Kyle, 955 So. 2d 284 (Miss. 2007). · cites it 6× “Contrary to the majority's holding, Miss.Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (Rev.2002) is not a mere evidentiary statute that this Court has the authority to overrule.”
Scott v. Flynt, 704 So. 2d 998 (Miss. 1996). · cites it 6× “503 and Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (4) is limited and not unconditional as ordered by the trial court.”
Swan v. Ip, Inc., 613 So. 2d 846 (Miss. 1993). · cites it 5× “See also, Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (4) (Supp. 1988).”
Jim Doe v. Rankin Med. Ctr., 195 So. 3d 705 (Miss. 2016). · cites it 3× “See Miss.Code Ann. § 13-1-21. ¶34. The physician-patient and/or, healthcare provider-patient privilege did not exist at common law.”
State v. Baptist Mem'l Hosp.-Golden Triangle, 726 So. 2d 554 (Miss. 1998). · cites it 9× “The hospital refused to comply with the subpoena duces tecum and the search warrant based on Miss.Code Ann. § 13-1-21, physician-patient privilege.”
Baptist Mem. Hosp. v. Johnson, 754 So. 2d 1165 (Miss. 2000). · cites it 3× “Under Miss.Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (Supp.1996) the applicable privilege is statutorily created and states: (1) All communications made to a physician, osteopath, dentist, hospital, nurse, pharmacist, podiatrist, optometrist or chiropractor by a patient under his charge or by one…”
Touchstone v. Touchstone, 682 So. 2d 374 (Miss. 1996). “Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21 provides a privilege for communications between a patient and physician, osteopath, dentist, hospital, nurse, pharmacist, podiatrist, optometrist or *380 chiropractor.”
In re Zyprexa Prods. Liab. Litig., 254 F.R.D. 50 (E.D.N.Y 2008). “§ 13:3734(A)(1); Miss.Code Ann. § 13-1-21; Mont.Code Ann. §§ 50-16-525, 50-16-535; La.”
Edwards v. Ellis, 478 So. 2d 282 (Miss. 1985). “Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (Supp. 1984). In refutation of Edwards's assertion of privilege, Ellis produced a medical authorization form, signed by Edwards and witnessed by his wife, which stated, in part, that it "constitutes [Edwards's] waiver of the physician/patient privilege…”
Lauderdale Cnty. Dhs v. Thg, 614 So. 2d 377 (Miss. 1993). “In relevant part, the statute provides that: All communications made to a physician, osteopath, dentist, hospital nurse, pharmacist, podiatrist, optometrist or chiropractor by a patient under his charge or by one seeking professional advice are hereby declared to be privileged,…”
Haynes v. Anderson, 597 So. 2d 615 (Miss. 1992). “Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (1972 & Supp. 1991) created a physician/patient privilege.”
Tinnon v. Martin, 716 So. 2d 604 (Miss. 1998). “The lower court entered an order allowing ex parte conferences on June 16, 1995, waiving the privilege only as to relevant information, relying on Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (4). The order provided that disclosure should not be limited by the patient or his attorney as to time,…”
Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21(1): 5 cases
Franklin Collection Serv., Inc. v. Kyle, 955 So. 2d 284 (Miss. 2007). “Contrary to the majority's holding, Miss.Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (Rev.2002) is not a mere evidentiary statute that this Court has the authority to overrule.”
State v. Baptist Mem'l Hosp.-Golden Triangle, 726 So. 2d 554 (Miss. 1998). “The hospital refused to comply with the subpoena duces tecum and the search warrant based on Miss.Code Ann. § 13-1-21, physician-patient privilege.”
Jones v. State, 881 So. 2d 209 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003).
Robinson v. State, 875 So. 2d 230 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004).
State v. BMH-GT, 726 So. 2d 554 (Miss. 1998).
Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21(3): 3 cases
Franklin Collection Serv., Inc. v. Kyle, 955 So. 2d 284 (Miss. 2007). “Contrary to the majority's holding, Miss.Code Ann. § 13-1-21 (Rev.2002) is not a mere evidentiary statute that this Court has the authority to overrule.”
Jim Doe v. Rankin Med. Ctr., 195 So. 3d 705 (Miss. 2016). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 13-1-21. ¶34. The physician-patient and/or, healthcare provider-patient privilege did not exist at common law.”
Thornton v. Statcare, PLLC, 988 So. 2d 387 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008).
Miss. Code Ann. § 13-1-21(4): 2 cases
Johnson v. Mem'l Hosp. at Gulfport, 732 So. 2d 864 (Miss. 1998).
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.