17 Jan Virginia: Medical Malpractice – A Lawyer’s UVA
By Order entered December 13, 2016, in the wrongful death case of Williams v. Boyle and University of Virginia Physicians Group, No. CL15-406, Charlottesville Circuit Court granted Plaintiff’s broad-reaching multi-faceted Motion to Compel. Following the Orders in Mr. Waterman’s Rauchfuss v. Schultz medical malpractice case in Newport News, Williams progressively ordered onsite review of all autopsy, medications, order, lab, audit trail, protected health information [“PHI”] disclosure log, and other electronic medical records [“EMR”] for the patients, mother and deceased child; with hospital onsite review conducted by Va. S. Ct. Rule 4:5(b)(6) deposition; and with the parties’ experts permitted to participate in viewing and inspecting the EMR contemporaneously. Id. at 1-2.
Also in the Williams medical malpractice case, the Court ordered the Defendant hospital to produce all procedures, policies, and protocols for external fetal and neonatal death reporting; for internal reporting and tracking of fetal neonatal deaths; and for creation, storage, and maintenance of electronic health records. Id. at 2-3. The Court additionally ordered production of all correspondence between the hospital and the physician practice about the patients. Id. at 3.
Further, Williams ordered production of all factual information in any witness statements, adverse event report, root cause analysis, quality assurance meeting, mortality and morbidity conference, or Be Safe reporting about either patient. Id. at 4. Notably, the hospital presumptively was required to produce all responsive materials within one (1) week of hearing, unless it had a specific reason for not producing some item, in which event it had only two (2) more weeks to produce the same. Id.