Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6155 (2026)

 Rights of patients.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 6155.  Rights of patients.

(a)  Protective order.--Any patient whose medical charts or records are copied and delivered pursuant to this subchapter, any person acting on such patient's behalf and the health care facility having custody of the charts or records shall have standing to apply to the court or other body before which the action or proceeding is pending for a protective order denying, restricting or otherwise limiting access to and use of the copies or original charts and records.

(b)  Rights to records generally.--

(1)  A patient or his designee, including his attorney, shall have the right of access to his medical charts and records and to obtain photocopies of the same, without the use of a subpoena duces tecum, for his own use. A health care provider or facility shall not charge a patient or his designee, including his attorney, a fee in excess of the amounts set forth in section 6152(a)(2)(i) (relating to subpoena of records).

(2)  Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as requiring an insurer to pay for medical records required to validate medical services for which reimbursement is sought under an insurance contract, except as provided in:

(i)  the act of June 2, 1915 (P.L.736, No.338), known as the Workers' Compensation Act, and the regulations promulgated thereunder;

(ii)  75 Pa.C.S. Ch. 17 (relating to financial responsibility) and the regulations promulgated thereunder; or

(iii)  a contract between an insurer and any other party.

(Feb. 18, 1998, P.L.170, No.26, eff. 60 days)

 

1998 Amendment.  Act 26 amended subsec. (b).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: Buckman v. Verazin, 54 A.3d 956 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2012).
Buckman v. Verazin, 54 A.3d 956 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2012). “These parties also cite 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(a), which gives a “health care facility having custody of the charts or records .”
Wayne M. Chiurazzi Law Inc. v. MRO Corp., 97 A.3d 275 (Pa. 2014). “42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(b)(1). . In its Superior Court brief, MRO acknowledged that its third and fourth questions had not been passed upon or certified, as its Statement of Questions provided that the "answer below” to each question was: "Not specifically addressed, but impliedly…”
Brown v. City of Pittsburgh, 543 F. Supp. 2d 448 (W.D. Pa. 2008). “1 (2000) (all communications between a sexual assault counselor and a victim, counselor, and/or co-participant are confidential); 42 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 6155 (1998) (a patient’s medical records are generally protected from compelled disclosure).”
Hunt v. Pennsylvania Dep't of Corr., 698 A.2d 147 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1997). “DOC cites Section 6155 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155, which it characterizes as recognizing a patient’s interest in the confidentiality of medical records by granting him or her the opportunity to seek a court order preventing their disclosure.”
R. DuBoise v. B. Rumcik (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2021). · cites it 3× “3 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(b)(1) (relating to patient rights to records).”
P. Vega v. J.E. Wetzel, Former Sec'y. of PA/D.O.C.'s (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025). · cites it 3× “In January 2022, Petitioner filed a petition for review, asserting an absolute right to a copy of his medical records under Section 6155(b)(1) of the Medical Records Act (Records Act),2 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(b)(1).3 See Pet. for Rev.”
R. DuBoise v. B. Rumcik (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2022). · cites it 2× “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(a). 14 be impacted if staff cannot honestly record their assessments and misdiagnoses lead to erroneous institutional placement.”
S. Williams v. PA DOC (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). “42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(b)(1) (emphasis added).”
Hoover v. Amsler, 9 Pa. D. & C.4th 260 (1990). · cites it 2× “” 42 Pa.C.S. §6155(a). “Patient or patient designees shall be given access to or a copy of their medical records .”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6155(a) — 3 cases
Buckman v. Verazin, 54 A.3d 956 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2012). “These parties also cite 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(a), which gives a “health care facility having custody of the charts or records .”
R. DuBoise v. B. Rumcik (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2022). “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(a). 14 be impacted if staff cannot honestly record their assessments and misdiagnoses lead to erroneous institutional placement.”
Hoover v. Amsler, 9 Pa. D. & C.4th 260 (1990). “” 42 Pa.C.S. §6155(a). “Patient or patient designees shall be given access to or a copy of their medical records .”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6155(b) — 1 case
Hoover v. Amsler, 9 Pa. D. & C.4th 260 (1990). “” 42 Pa.C.S. §6155(a). “Patient or patient designees shall be given access to or a copy of their medical records .”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 6155(b)(1) — 5 cases
Wayne M. Chiurazzi Law Inc. v. MRO Corp., 97 A.3d 275 (Pa. 2014). “42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(b)(1). . In its Superior Court brief, MRO acknowledged that its third and fourth questions had not been passed upon or certified, as its Statement of Questions provided that the "answer below” to each question was: "Not specifically addressed, but impliedly…”
R. DuBoise v. B. Rumcik (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2021). “3 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(b)(1) (relating to patient rights to records).”
P. Vega v. J.E. Wetzel, Former Sec'y. of PA/D.O.C.'s (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2025). “In January 2022, Petitioner filed a petition for review, asserting an absolute right to a copy of his medical records under Section 6155(b)(1) of the Medical Records Act (Records Act),2 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(b)(1).3 See Pet. for Rev.”
S. Williams v. PA DOC (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2016). “42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(b)(1) (emphasis added).”
R. DuBoise v. B. Rumcik (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2022). “” 42 Pa.C.S. § 6155(a). 14 be impacted if staff cannot honestly record their assessments and misdiagnoses lead to erroneous institutional placement.”
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.