Crist v. Moffatt

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Crist v. Moffatt

374 S.E.2d 487, 92 N.C. App. 520, 1988 N.C. App. LEXIS 1063

CourtCourt of Appeals of North Carolina

DecidedDecember 30, 1988

Docket8828SC466

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 374 S.E.2d 487 (Crist v. Moffatt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Crist v. Moffatt, 374 S.E.2d 487, 92 N.C. App. 520, 1988 N.C. App. LEXIS 1063 (N.C. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

WELLS, Judge.

Defendant seeks to have this admittedly interlocutory order reversed in this appeal. We decline to do so and dismiss the appeal.

N.C. Gen. Stat. § l-277(a) provides:

An appeal may be taken from every judicial order or determination of a judge of a superior or district court, upon or involving a matter of law or legal inference, . . . which affects a substantial right claimed in any action or proceeding; or which in effect determines the action, and prevents a judgment from which an appeal might be taken; or discontinues the action, or grants or refuses a new trial.

See also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-27(d).

The right defendant asserts Judge Hyatt’s order denied him is to privately interview plaintiffs treating physicians, defendant contending that these physicians are “fact” witnesses with knowledge of the events and circumstances underlying plaintiffs claims for relief. By this disingenuous argument, defendant asserts that he could unilaterally assume that plaintiff had waived the physician/patient privilege afforded her under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8-53, by disclosing the fact that she was treated, by furnishing, pursuant to a discovery request, her medical records resulting from treatment by her physicians, and by participating in the taking of her deposition. We reject this argument.

*523 We do not perceive that Judge Hyatt’s order deprived defendant of any right, substantial or otherwise.

Appeal dismissed.

Judges Arnold and Cozort concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WELLS, Judge.

Defendant seeks to have this admittedly interlocutory order reversed in this appeal. We decline to do so and dismiss the appeal.

N.C. Gen. Stat. § l-277(a) provides:

An appeal may be taken from every judicial order or determination of a judge of a superior or district court, upon or involving a matter of law or legal inference, . . . which affects a substantial right claimed in any action or proceeding; or which in effect determines the action, and prevents a judgment from which an appeal might be taken; or discontinues the action, or grants or refuses a new trial.

See also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-27(d).

The right defendant asserts Judge Hyatt’s order denied him is to privately interview plaintiffs treating physicians, defendant contending that these physicians are “fact” witnesses with knowledge of the events and circumstances underlying plaintiffs claims for relief. By this disingenuous argument, defendant asserts that he could unilaterally assume that plaintiff had waived the physician/patient privilege afforded her under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8-53, by disclosing the fact that she was treated, by furnishing, pursuant to a discovery request, her medical records resulting from treatment by her physicians, and by participating in the taking of her deposition. We reject this argument.

*523 We do not perceive that Judge Hyatt’s order deprived defendant of any right, substantial or otherwise.

Appeal dismissed.

Judges Arnold and Cozort concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

374 S.E.2d 487, 92 N.C. App. 520, 1988 N.C. App. LEXIS 1063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crist-v-moffatt-ncctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack