Stumpf v. Continental Casualty Co., 102 Or App 302 (1990).
Admissibility of Medical Peer Review Findings
Physician brought an excess liability case against its insurer for negligent investigation, evaluation, and negotiation of a medical malpractice claim. Insurer was not entitled to refer to or examine witnesses about the peer review committee which reviewed the underlying case against the insured physician. ORS 41.675 provides that communications submitted to the peer review committee or findings of that committee are privileged and are not admissible in any judicial proceeding. The insurer intended to offer the testimony of a member of the peer review committee that the committee reviewed the care given by the insured physician and that such review affected the insurer’s evaluation of the underlying case. The court held that such testimony was inadmissible because the necessary inference is that the case was defensible which would convey the substance of the committee’s findings.
State ex rel Grimm v. Ashmanskas, 298 Or 206 (1984).
Plaintiff's discovery deposition of a defendant treating physician in a malpractice action constitutes waiver of the plaintiff's physician-patient privilege with respect to other treating physicians concerning the same conditions.
SETTLEMENT
PREEMPTION