Khairzdah v. Khairzdah

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Khairzdah v. Khairzdah

464 So. 2d 1311, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 658, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12941

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 13, 1985

DocketNo. 84-2684

StatusPublished

This text of 464 So. 2d 1311 (Khairzdah v. Khairzdah) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Khairzdah v. Khairzdah, 464 So. 2d 1311, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 658, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12941 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

DOWNEY, Judge.

The issue in this appeal from a non-final order, which we treat as a petition for writ of certiorari, involves the application of the psychotherapist-patient privilege afforded by section 90.503, Florida Statutes (1983).

During the course of their domestic relations case both husband and wife requested custody of their minor children, each contending that he or she was a fit and proper custodial parent. The husband subpoenaed psychological hospital records from Bro-ward General Medical Center pertaining to the wife’s treatment during a period prior to the commencement of this litigation. Although the wife objected thereto and sought a protective order based upon the statutory privilege extended by section 90.-503, Florida Statutes (1983), the trial court denied the motion.

In our judgment, this case is controlled by McIntyre v. McIntyre, 404 So.2d 208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), Mohammad v. Mohammad, 358 So.2d 610 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), and Roper v. Roper, 336 So.2d 654 [1312]*1312(Fla. 4th DCA 1976). Appellant’s reliance upon Miraglia v. Miraglia, 462 So.2d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), Davidge v. Davidge, 451 So.2d 1051 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), and Critchlow v. Critchlow, 347 So.2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), is misplaced. The factual situations in those cases brought them under a statutory exception to the privilege.

Accordingly, the order denying petitioner’s motion for protective order is quashed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

GLICKSTEIN and BARRETT, JJ., concur.

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

DOWNEY, Judge.

The issue in this appeal from a non-final order, which we treat as a petition for writ of certiorari, involves the application of the psychotherapist-patient privilege afforded by section 90.503, Florida Statutes (1983).

During the course of their domestic relations case both husband and wife requested custody of their minor children, each contending that he or she was a fit and proper custodial parent. The husband subpoenaed psychological hospital records from Bro-ward General Medical Center pertaining to the wife’s treatment during a period prior to the commencement of this litigation. Although the wife objected thereto and sought a protective order based upon the statutory privilege extended by section 90.-503, Florida Statutes (1983), the trial court denied the motion.

In our judgment, this case is controlled by McIntyre v. McIntyre, 404 So.2d 208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), Mohammad v. Mohammad, 358 So.2d 610 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), and Roper v. Roper, 336 So.2d 654 [1312]*1312(Fla. 4th DCA 1976). Appellant’s reliance upon Miraglia v. Miraglia, 462 So.2d 507 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), Davidge v. Davidge, 451 So.2d 1051 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), and Critchlow v. Critchlow, 347 So.2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), is misplaced. The factual situations in those cases brought them under a statutory exception to the privilege.

Accordingly, the order denying petitioner’s motion for protective order is quashed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

GLICKSTEIN and BARRETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

464 So. 2d 1311, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 658, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12941, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/khairzdah-v-khairzdah-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack