Epstein Becker Green obtained a dismissal of a case brought by two plaintiffs—a state psychological association and an individual psychologist—seeking broad limitations, through the application of the patient-psychologist privilege, on the information that a health benefits plan could seek from or concerning insureds to establish the medical necessity of initial or continued mental health treatment. The New Jersey court found that neither plaintiff had a direct injury or associational or third-party standing and questions of privilege needed to be determined in the sort of case-by-case approach that precluded the granting of broad, general relief against the health benefits plan or those providing administrative or utilization management review services to the plan.
Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
People
Managing Director / Member of the Firm
