Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

SER HCR Manorcare v. Hon. James C. Stucky, Judge

West Virginia Supreme Court

Decided June 9, 2015No. 15-0094Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDavis, Justice

The Petitioners asked this Court to require the circuit court to conduct an in camera review with respect to two sets of documents. The Petitioners argued that documents labeled Briefing Packets were protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege. The Petitioners also argued that documents labeled Center Visit Summaries were protected from disclosure by a peer review privilege. The majority opinion has granted relief to the Petitioners, in part, and denied relief, in part. With respect to disclosure of the Briefing Packets, the majority opinion has held that the circuit court must…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Carolan v. HillSupreme Court of Iowa · 1996
  2. Aga v. HundahlHawaii Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Carr v. HowardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1998
  4. Shroades Ex Rel. Shroades v. HenryWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1985

16 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