26 Apr Virginia: Medical Malpractice – a Lawyer’s USBs
By letter opinion on April 21, 2016, Newport News Circuit Court granted Plaintiff patient’s Motion to Enforce §8.01-413(C) Subpoena Dues Tecum and denied Defendant hospital’s Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum and for Protective Order in the alleged wrongful death case of Myers v. Riverside Hospital, Inc. et al., No. CL1600298B-04. Three different Newport News Judges now have vindicated Mr. Waterman seeking Riverside to provide him its audit trails and metadata of a patient’s electronic medical record on USB pursuant to a medical authorization without a medical malpractice lawsuit having been served.
In Myers, Riverside sought to relitigate the patient’s entitlement to his electronic medical record on USB (instead of being confined only to one-site electronic review) before a new judge after another judge who previously ruled against Riverside retired. Riverside in the Myers medical malpractice proceeding also unsuccessfully interposed a new “cost” argument – claiming that the USB costing money to produce excused it from production altogether – with the judge allocating the actual cost to the requesting party, while requiring Riverside first to provide a good faith cost approximation and allowing Plaintiff patient to contest the same at another hearing if so desired.
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.