Osborn v. Fabatz

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the defendant had no standing to invoke a third party's physician-patient privilege in a paternity action
• stating that “[a] communication between a person and a physician which is for the purpose of a lawsuit, and not for treatment or advice as to treatment, is not protected by the physician-patient privilege” (citation omitted)
• Communication between a person and a physician that is for the purpose of a lawsuit, and not for treatment or advice regarding treatment, is not protected by the physician-patient privilege.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).