Evidence: Privileged Communications between Physician and Patient in California: Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1881 (4)

1932 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 302
Author(s):  
Samuel I. Jacobs
2003 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward J. Imwinkelried

From society’s perspective, the rules governing privileged communications such as those between a client and his or her attorney are arguably the most important doctrines in evidence law. Most evidentiary doctrines relate to the court’s institutional concerns. By way of example, the best evidence and hearsay rules are largely designed to enhance the reliability of the evidence on which the trier of fact bases his or her findings. The primary impact of these rules is on the in-court behavior of witnesses, attorneys, and judges.


1964 ◽  
Vol 19 (11) ◽  
pp. 831-837 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert L. Geiser ◽  
Paul D. Rheingold

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-70
Author(s):  
Robert E. Paul

This article defines and describes the interrelated but conceptually distinct terms “confidentiality,” “privilege,” “privileged communications,” “privacy,” and “records.” It reviews the parameters of these words, discusses the variance between the extent of the physician-patient and that of the much broader licensed psychologist-patient privilege in Pennsylvania and, in particular, reviews the situations in which assertions of confidentiality and privilege cannot prevent third parties from gaining access to records and the information contained in them and the legal cases which set out the law in these areas. Finally, it reviews the demands to see records by patients and the increasing willingness of courts, legislators, and regulators to grant not only access but also the right to correct, add to, or destroy such records if the patient wishes to do so.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document