Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Bray v. Khuri

Supreme Court of Tennessee, Jackson

July 5, 2017

DEBORAH BRAY
v.
RADWAN R. KHURI, M.D.

          Session Heard at Nashville February 8, 2017

         Appeal by Permission from the Court of Appeals Circuit Court for Shelby County No. CT-004039 Donna M. Fields, Judge.

         Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-26-121(a)(2)(E) requires a person who asserts a potential claim for healthcare liability to include with pre-suit notice a HIPAA-compliant[1] medical authorization permitting the healthcare provider who receives the notice to obtain complete medical records "from each other provider being sent the notice." Tenn. Code Ann. § 29-26-121(a)(2)(E). Here, the plaintiff sent pre-suit notice of her claim to a single healthcare provider and included a medical authorization. After the plaintiff filed suit, the defendant healthcare provider moved to dismiss, asserting the plaintiff had failed to provide a HIPAA-compliant medical authorization. The trial court granted the motion, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. We hold that a prospective plaintiff who provides pre-suit notice to one potential defendant is not required under Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-26-121(a)(2)(E) to provide the single potential defendant with a HIPAA-compliant medical authorization. We reverse the judgments of the trial court and the Court of Appeals and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 11 Appeal by Permission; Judgments of the Trial Court and the Court of Appeals Reversed and Remanded.

          Duncan E. Ragsdale, William R. Bruce, and Aaron L. Thomas, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Deborah Bray.

          James T. McColgan, III and Sherry S. Fernandez, Cordova, Tennessee, for the appellee, Radwan R. Khuri, M.D.

          W. Bryan Smith, Memphis, Tennessee; John Vail, Washington, D.C.; and Brian G. Brooks, Greenbrier, Arkansas, for amicus curiae, Tennessee Association for Justice.

          Sharon G. Lee, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Jeffrey S. Bivins, C.J., Cornelia A. Clark, Holly Kirby, and Roger A. Page, JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          SHARON G. LEE, JUSTICE.

         I.

         Between the evening of March 25 and the morning of March 26, 2003, Nigel Bray committed suicide at Saint Francis Hospital in Memphis. Dr. Radwan Khuri provided psychiatric care to Mr. Bray from the time of his hospital admission on March 20 until his death less than a week later.

         In March 2004, Deborah Bray, Mr. Bray's surviving spouse, filed a healthcare liability case against Dr. Khuri alleging negligence in the care and treatment of Mr. Bray. In May 2010, after the parties had engaged in pretrial discovery, Mrs. Bray voluntarily dismissed the suit.

         In May 2011, Mrs. Bray sent Dr. Khuri pre-suit notice of her healthcare liability claim as required by section 29-26-121(a)(1). The pre-suit notice letter advised Dr. Khuri of a potential claim by Mrs. Bray for the wrongful death of her husband arising out of the medical and psychiatric treatment Dr. Khuri provided to Mr. Bray at Saint Francis Hospital. The notice, which included a medical authorization signed by Mrs. Bray, stated that Dr. Khuri was the only healthcare provider receiving the notice.

         In September 2011, Mrs. Bray filed a healthcare liability suit against Dr. Khuri. Dr. Khuri moved to dismiss the case, asserting that Mrs. Bray had failed to provide a HIPAA-compliant medical authorization under section 29-26-121(a)(2)(E). Dr. Khuri argued that because the authorization was incomplete and not HIPAA-compliant, [2] he could not discuss Mr. Bray's medical records with counsel to prepare a defense to the potential claim. Mrs. Bray responded, in part, that no ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.