13 Jun Virginia: Medical Malpractice – a Lawyer’s Norfolk
On June 10, 2015, Norfolk Circuit Court entered 4/15/15 & 6/2/15 Order in Mr. Waterman’s alleged wrongful death case, Talton v. Sentara Hosps., et al., No. CL15000313-00. The Judge granted Patient’s Motion to Enforce Va. Code §8.01-413(C) Subpoena Duces Tecum and Patient’s Motion for Entry of Order, and denied Sentara’s Motion to Quash Subpoena and Sentara’s Motion for Entry.
In the Talton alleged patient fall case, “[t]he Court FINDS Va. Code §8.01-413 entitles patients to receive:  any audit trails (including “fine grain”) and metadata;  any so-called Quality Care Control Report, Quality Assurance, Quality Referral, Log, Abstract, Data, Tool, Worksheet, Variance Report, Assessment, Initial Report Preview, Legal Copy Preview, Information, Follow-Up, “huddle” material, and other similar incident report or entry about the incident (regardless how named);  any so-called Quality Management System, Midas System, STARS system, Quantros system, and other incident-related database entry/data/printout (regardless how named);  any so-called Sentinel Event Report, Root Cause Analysis Report, Apparent Cause Analysis, Causes and Coding Worksheets, Follow-Up Preview of Event, witness statements, timelines, notes, minutes, or other investigative materials (regardless how named); and  any other facility or healthcare provider files, records, papers, data, and other materials whatsoever re facts and information relating to the care of patient (including particularly any Risk Management materials or the like); provided, however, as to any responsive material of a committee/entity protected under Va. Code §8.01-581.16, patient is entitled only the factual information therein, and “deliberative analysis” of such committee/entity shall be redacted.” (emphasis in original) This Talton Order “VACATES the Order entered by the Court electronically on May 28, 2015, without Plaintiff counsel’s endorsement; and ENLARGES the Court’s letter opinion on April 16, 2015.” (emphasis in original).
THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR REQUIRES ALL LAWYERS TO POST THE FOLLOWING DISCLAIMERS ON ALL CASE-RELATED POSTS. MR. WATERMAN’S CASE RESULTS AND CLIENT TESTIMONIALS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE. THEY DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE CASE BY HIM.