PAYTON CASTILLO v. DAVID LLOYD REX, M.D. ET AL. - Articles

All Content

PAYTON CASTILLO v. DAVID LLOYD REX, M.D. ET AL.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on May 9, 2025

Court: TN Supreme Court

Attorneys 1: Cara E. Weiner and Christopher R. Ramsey, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the appellants Memorial Health Care System, Inc. and Memorial Health Care System, Inc. d/b/a/ CHI Memorial.

Attorneys 2: H. Dean Clements and Brie Allaman Stewart, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the appellants, Thomas R. Rimer and Diagnostic Imaging Consultants, P.C.

Attorneys 3: J. Eric Miles and Brigham A. Dixson, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellants, Virtual Radiologic Services, LLC, David Lloyd Rex, Virtual Radiologic Corporation, Virtual Radiologic Professionals, LLC, and Virtual Radiologic Professionals of Minnesota, P.A.

Attorneys 4: Alix C. Michel and David J. Ward, Chattanooga, Tennessee, for the appellee, Payton Castillo.

Attorneys 5: Raymond Grant Lewallen, Jr., Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Amicus Curiae, Tennessee Defense Lawyers Association.

Attorneys 6: Craig P. Sanders and Ashley D. Cleek, Jackson, Tennessee, for the Amicus Curiae, Tennessee Hospital Association.

Attorneys 7: W. Bryan Smith, Memphis, Tennessee, and Brian G. Brooks, Greenbrier, Arkansas, for the Amicus Curiae, Tennessee Trial Lawyers Association.

Judge(s): TARWATER

In this appeal, we examine the privilege provided under Tennessee Code Annotated section 68-11-272, commonly referred to as the quality improvement committee or “QIC” privilege, and its application. Plaintiff filed this healthcare liability action asserting that CHI Memorial Hospital and other entities and physicians were negligent in providing care for her husband, who passed away shortly after being discharged from the hospital’s emergency room. Defendants sought a protective order based on the QIC privilege to prohibit inquiry into a meeting held by the hospital and the decedent’s family. The trial court denied Defendants’ motion. On interlocutory review, the Court of Appeals affirmed, finding that statements made in the meeting were not protected by the QIC privilege. Defendants appealed, arguing that the information sought related to QIC activities and therefore was privileged from direct or indirect discovery. We hold the QIC privilege applied to statements made during the meeting that were based on information obtained during the QIC process, but Memorial waived the privilege when hospital management voluntarily disclosed that privileged information.

Attachments: