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

Florida recognizes a patient’s right to privacy in medical records in its state constitution Fla. Const. Art. I, 23. Florida Statute §456.057 also governs control of patient records and provides generally that medical records cannot be disclosed absent written consent of the patient or a court order. See Crowley v. Lamming, 66 So.3d 355 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). As such, a physician is not required to release his or her patients’ medical records upon an insurer’s demand without the patients’ written authorization, even though an agreement between the insurer and the physician provides that the physician will deliver records upon demand. Humana Medical Plan, Inc. v. Fischman, 750 So.2d 677 (Fla. 4^th DCA 1999).

Where a person brings a legal claim which makes his or her physical or mental health or condition a material element of a claim, however, that party waives privilege. A party clearly waives privilege with respect to treatment for parts of the body directly related to the claimed physical injuries related to the incident. Rojas v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., 625 So.2d 106 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). A party may object, however, to production of medical records which they contend relate to treatment or conditions unrelated to the incident at issue. In such cases, the Court should conduct an in camera inspection to determine the relevance of those records, and has broad discretion to order their production. Id. Because the court has broad discretion in discovery matters, there is no precise temporal limitation on how far back a court can allow a defendant to inquire about a plaintiff’s medical history. However, almost all courts will find any request in excess of 10 years overbroad, with many courts finding a request in excess of 5 years overbroad absent a showing of specific relevance.

To obtain mental health records of a plaintiff, the defendant must show that the plaintiff has placed his or her mental condition in issue. Where a plaintiff asserts claims for emotional distress or mental anguish, he opens the door to the defendant obtaining their mental health records. Garbacik v. Wal-Mart Transp., LLC, 932 So.2d 500 (Fla. 5^th DCA 2006). However, this waiver is not irrevocable. Rather, the Plaintiff can voluntarily abandon his or her claim for emotional distress or mental anguish damages at any time in litigation, even after undergoing a compulsory medical examination, at which point their mental health is once again deemed irrelevant and the court will not permit discovery as to mental health records. Id.; see also Commercial Carrier Corp v. Kelley, 903 So.2d 240 (Fla. 5^th DCA 2005).

Likewise, although a party’s prior drug use or treatment for drug addiction is normally protected from discovery, where a plaintiff denies prior use or treatment, the defendant is entitled to discovery of that information for the purpose of impeachment. Nelson v. Labor Finders, 897 So.2d 501 (Fla. 1^st DCA 2005).