What limitations exist, if any, on a defendant’s ability to obtain a plaintiff’s complete medical history, both pre and post incident?

The only statutory limitations to obtaining a plaintiff’s complete medical history, both pre and post incident, are limitations imposed upon health care practitioners by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”), 42 U.S.C. §1320d, et seq, and Connecticut’s corresponding statutes, C.G.S. §52-146c, et seq, which permit disclosure of a patient’s medical history only when proper authorization is received from the patient. Certain medical providers in Connecticut require use of their own authorization forms for the release of medical information.

However, Connecticut courts will limit the scope of the medical records to be produced based upon the conditions “placed at issue” by the plaintiff. In particular, if the records sought are not material to the physical, emotional, or other injuries alleged by the Plaintiff to have been sustained, a plaintiff may successfully convince a court to either prevent discovery, or to redact those portions that are immaterial. See Greer v. Ryan, 2010 WL 4353803 (Conn. Super. Ct. Oct. 14, 2010).

Courts will examine the scope of the claims of damages, as well as any possible defenses that claimed injuries have a cause other than that for which they are responsible. See Thompson v. Revonet, Inc., 2006 WL 8446753 (D. Conn., 2006). The time period for which a party is required to produce medical records may also hinge upon the scope of the claimed injury. See Mutts v. Southern Conn. State Univ., 2005 WL 81661176 (D. Conn., 2005).

Thus, in evaluating whether a “complete,” or more limited history, can be obtained, the first step is to see whether the Plaintiff has asserted broad claims of injuries, permanent lifestyle changes, or other damages which are such that their analysis requires in-depth evaluation. If the pleadings follow that pattern, it is likely a successful argument can be made that Plaintiff chose to “place at issue” his or her complete (or at least, lengthy) medical history and/or psychological condition. If, however, plaintiff’s counsel has been more circumscribed in asserting the claims, it may be that, at least initially, a court will restrict the disclosure, and it will be incumbent upon the defendant to try to broaden the scope through reviewing records as they are received and during plaintiff’s deposition.