Attorneys for the nurse demanded through formal pretrial discovery copies of the records of the hospital’s quality review committee as to the particular incident that led to this nurse’s termination.  Attorneys for the hospital declined to honor the nurse’s attorneys’ demand, insisting that the requested records were privileged and exempt from discovery or use as evidence in a civil lawsuit.

  The US District Court for the District of New Hampshire overruled the hospital’s objection and said the nurse’s attorneys have the right to the committee’s records for this nurse’s incident.  The quality assurance/peer review privilege arises under state law. However, state-law rules of evidentiary privilege do not apply in a Federal court when the Federal court considers a question of Federal law, in this case whether Federal antidiscrimination laws were violated.

  Medical confidentiality under the US Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is a separate issue from the quality assurance/peer review privilege.  Both sides agreed in this case that when and if the committee’s records were disclosed, patient identifying information would be redacted.  Even if everyone knew the patient’s identity if she was the plaintiff in a lawsuit, technical compliance with HIPAA was still required.