Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 731 SO2D 87 - Katlein v. State

Katlein v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 2012

6 state decisions

40199920002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Pennsylvania v. Ritchie · Commonwealth v. Bishop · State v. Smith · People v. Gissendanner · State v. Pinder

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) A clinical record shall be maintained for each patient. The record shall include data pertaining to admission and such other information as may be required under rules of the department. A clinical record is confidential and exempt from the provisions of s. 119.07(1). Unless waived by express and informed consent, by the patient or the patient's guardian or guardian advocate ... the confidential status of the clinical record shall not be lost by either authorized or unauthorized disclosure to any person, organization, or agency. (2) The clinical record shall be released when: (a) The patient or the patient's guardian authorizes the release.... (b) The patient is represented by counsel and the records are needed by the patient's counsel for adequate representation. (c) The court orders such release. In determining whether there is good cause for disclosure, the court shall weigh the need for the information to be disclosed against the possible harm of disclosure to the person to whom such information pertains.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “establish a reasonable probability that the privileged matters contain material information necessary to his defense,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Such records may not be disclosed without the written consent of the individual to whom they pertain except that appropriate disclosure may be made without such consent: 1. To medical personnel in a medical emergency. 2. To service provider personnel if such personnel need to know the information in order to carry out duties relating to the provision of services to an individual. 3. To the secretary of the department or the secretary’s designee, for purposes of scientific research, in accordance with federal confidentiality regulations, but only upon agreement in writing that the individual's name and other identifying information will not be disclosed. 4. In the course of review of service provider records by persons who are performing an audit or evaluation on behalf of any federal, state, or local government agency, or third-party payor providing financial assistance or reimbursement to the service provider; however, reports produced as a result of such audit or evaluation may not disclose names or other identifying information and must be in accordance with federal confidentiality regulations. 5.Upon court order based on application showing good cause for disclosure. In determining whether there is good cause for disclosure, the court shall examine whether the public interest and the need for disclosure outweigh the potential injury to the individual, to the service provider and the individual, and to the service provider itself.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.