Attorney General v. Bruce

We respectfully dissent.

In essence, the appellees’ argument is that. 1) since the confidentiality provisions of article 17 provide that review function records "shall be used only for the purposes provided in this article” (rather than in this act) these records are unavailable in an article 15 investigation, and 2) an article 15 subpoena for this material is precluded by article 17’s confidentiality provisions that peer review materials "shall not be available for court subpoena.”

Thus, on the one hand, appellees contend that articles 15 and 17 are to be read separately and, on the other,…