Legal Opinion
Brillantes v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 27, 1996No. B100434PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
KITCHING, J.
In this action for mandamus relief, we consider whether a physician suspected of Medi-Cal fraud should be afforded, as a matter of right under People v. Superior Court (Bauman & Rose) (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1757 [44 Cal.Rptr.2d 734] (hereafter Bauman & Rose), a Penal Code section 1524, subdivision (c) hearing 1 to determine the applicability of the physician-patient privilege to patient files seized from his office pursuant to a search warrant. 2
Bauman & Rose recognized the trial court’s authority to hold an in camera hearing to determine the validity of the assertion of the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Mitchell v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
- MTR OF CAMPERLENGO v. BlumNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Deukmejian v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
- In Re Grand Jury InvestigationSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1982
- PSC Geothermal Services Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Olszewski v. Scripps HealthCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Burns v. BoydenUtah Supreme Court · 2006
- Gordon v. Superior Court of L.A. Cty.California Court of Appeal · 1997
- Olszewski v. Scripps HealthCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003