Do Washington's industrial-insurance statutes waive the physician-patient privilege for purposes of the ethics rules?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked about the effect of RCW 51.04.050 and 51.36.060 on whether the physician-patient privilege is waived, in relation to the bar association's Formal Opinion 180. The committee was of the opinion that whether the effect of those statutes is to waive the privilege is a legal question on which the committee cannot render an opinion.

Because the committee does not decide questions of law, it could say nothing further than that Formal Opinion 180 must be complied with.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1987, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. It interprets no rule of professional conduct; it defers a question of statutory interpretation and points to Formal Opinion 180, both of which predate the current rules and may have been affected by later statutory or rule changes. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules and current law before relying on any specific point.

Common questions

Q: Did the committee decide whether the workers'-compensation statutes waive the physician-patient privilege?

A: No. The committee was of the opinion that whether the statutes waive the privilege is a legal question on which it cannot render an opinion.

Q: What did the committee say the inquirer should do?

A: The committee said it could say nothing further than that Formal Opinion 180 must be complied with.

Background and rules framework

The committee cited no rule of professional conduct. It identified the statutory-waiver question as one of law, outside the committee's role, and resolved the inquiry by directing compliance with the bar's existing Formal Opinion 180 on the subject. The statutes referenced, RCW 51.04.050 and 51.36.060, are part of Washington's industrial-insurance (workers' compensation) framework.

Citations and references

The opinion cites no rule of professional conduct or case.

Statutes:

• RCW 51.04.050 and RCW 51.36.060 (Washington industrial-insurance provisions), identified by the committee as raising a legal question it would not decide.

Other opinions cited:

• WSBA Formal Opinion 180: the committee stated it must be complied with.

See also

• WSBA Ethics Op. 956: Formal Opinion 180 extends to medical records
• WSBA Ethics Op. 940: the marital privilege when contacting an opposing party's former spouse

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=190

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Advisory Opinion: 1079
Year Issued: 1987
RPC(s): RCW 51.04.050; 51.36.060; Formal Opinion 180
Subject: Waiver of physician-patient privilege

The Committee considered your inquiry concerning the effect of RCW 51.04.050 and 51.36.060 on the question of waiver of the physician-patient privilege in relation to Formal Opinion 180 of the Washington State Bar Association. The Committee was of the opinion that the question of whether the effect of those statutes is to waive the privilege is a legal question on which the Committee cannot render an opinion. Therefore, the Committee could say nothing further than to state that Formal Opinion 180 must be complied with.