Legal Opinion

Zane v. Friends Hospital

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 19, 2003PublishedCited by 163 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Chief Justice CAPPY.

We granted allocatur to consider a limited exception to the coordinate jurisdiction rule. As part of our review, we are asked to evaluate the breadth of the confidentiality provision of the Pennsylvania Mental Health Procedures Act (the “Mental Health Procedures Act”), 50 P.S. § 7101 et seq., as well as the statutory provision regarding confidential communications to psychiatrists and licensed psychologists found at 42 Pa.C.S. *240§ 5944. For the reasons stated below, we reverse the order of the Superior Court.

Appellee Jerilyn Zane (“Zane”) brought a negligence action…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. StarrSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  2. Buffalo Township v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  3. Riccio v. American Republic InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  4. Okkerse v. HoweSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
  5. Coretsky v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by163 opinions

  1. In Re Canvass of Absentee Ballots of Nov. 4, 2003 General ElectionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  2. Commonwealth v. SamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  3. Koken v. Reliance InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
  4. Mariner Chestnut Partners, L.P. Ex Rel. Lamm v. LenfestSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  5. DiGregorio v. Keystone Health Plan EastSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003

158 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API