Illinois Cent. R. v. Western Smelting & Refining Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding privilege was maintained due to plaintiff’s proper stipulation that he would not rely on any treating provider to prove emotional distress
• finding that medical records involving mental health, including physical conditions tied to mental health, were relevant under the broad definition of relevance in Rule 26(b)(1)
• finding that medical records involving mental health, including physical conditions tied to mental health, were relevant under the broad definition of relevance in Rule 26(b)(1)
• examining at length different approaches to implicit waiver of the psychotherapist- patient privilege and adopting the narrowest approach
• psychological records are relevant in determining 4 whether there were other sources for plaintiffs’ distress
• “[T]he defendant may cross- examine the plaintiff . . . about other stressors or contributing factors that may explain or have contributed to the alleged emotional distress.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).