New Jersey Statutes

N.J. Stat. § 2A:84A-22.2 (2026)

Patient and physician privilege

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaN.J. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Except as otherwise provided in this act, a person, whether or not a party, has a privilege in a civil action or in a prosecution for a crime or violation of the disorderly persons law or for an act of juvenile delinquency to refuse to disclose, and to prevent a witness from disclosing, a communication, if he claims the privilege and the judge finds that (a) the communication was a confidential communication between patient and physician, and (b) the patient or the physician reasonably believed the communication to be necessary or helpful to enable the physician to make a diagnosis of the condition of the patient or to prescribe or render treatment therefor, and (c) the witness (i) is the holder of the privilege or (ii) at the time of the communication was the physician or a person to whom disclosure was made because reasonably necessary for the transmission of the communication or for the accomplishment of the purpose for which it was transmitted or (iii) is any other person who obtained knowledge or possession of the communication as the result of an intentional breach of the physician's duty of nondisclosure by the physician or his agent or servant and (d) the claimant is the holder of the privilege or a person authorized to claim the privilege for him.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1980–2016 · leading case: Wipf v. Altstiel, 2016 SD 97 (S.D. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Wipf v. Altstiel, 2016 SD 97 (S.D. 2016). · cites it 2× “1969) (interpreting New Jersey’s privilege rule, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:84A-22.2 (West 1968), which protected “a confidential communication between patient and physician”); Staley v.”

In Re Grand Jury Subpoena (Psychological Treatment Records), 710 F. Supp. 999 (D.N.J. 1989). · cites it 2× “503 (1987); N.J.Stat.Ann. § 2A:84A-22.2 (West 1976) (physician-patient privilege); N.”

In Re Est. of Wilson, 416 A.2d 228 (D.C. 1980). “1976) (in will contest the heirs, personal representative, or any proponent or contestant may waive); N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:84A-22.2 (West) (1976) (archaic waiver provision language; no use of terms "legal representative" or "personal representative" in statute); N.”

Wilson v. Thornton, 416 A.2d 228 (D.C. 1980). “1976) (in will contest the heirs, personal representative, or any proponent or contestant may waive); N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:84A-22.2 (West) (1976) (archaic waiver provision language; no use of terms “legal representative” or “personal representative” in statute); N.”

Green v. Cooper Med. Hosp., 968 F. Supp. 249 (E.D. Pa. 1997). “” N.J.S.A. 2A:84A-22.2. Mr. Green makes no claim either that he was Mr.”

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.