The HIPAA defense...
Mr. Harper, through Mr. Jacob, do you have any
questions to ask of Dr. Gleason?
MR. JACOB: Yes, Dr. Gleason. Thank you. Do you
have any information on how his surgery got to be timed for
this time?
THE COURT: Let me interrupt there for a second. I'm
not sure if you heard, Dr. Gleason, that Mr. Jacob is a lawyer
and also a cardiologist.
And, Mr. Jacob, that is news to me. Are you a
practicing cardiologist or was that some time ago?
MR. JACOB: I practiced in Scottsdale for about 12
years and then I went to law school and I don't practice now.
THE COURT: All right. So just in terms of
background now, Dr. Gleason, you have -- he certainly has more
expertise than I do.
So why don't you repeat the question for Dr. Gleason,
Mr. Jacob?
MR. JACOB: Yes. Dr. Gleason, I would like to figure
out whether the surgery was in some way elective or if it
urgently had to be scheduled for when it was done and I wonder
whether you have that information.
DR. GLEASON: I have that information. Again, I feel
that that type of question is, again, a HIPAA violation.
United States District Court
CV 13-00417-PHX-ROS, October 17, 2013
Denied....
The trial will continue...
My ruling is based upon what I've heard from Dr.
Gleason. He's obviously very qualified. He is a doctor, as is
clear. He did not want to violate any of his responsibilities
to his patient, is that he would take very good care to ensure
that his patient was not in harm's way.
So the trial will not be continued. It is going
forward as planned with the understanding that if Captain
Hummel is -- his situation becomes egregious, then counsel will bring it to my attention and I will reconsider.
United States District Court
CV 13-00417-PHX-ROS, October 17, 2013