Can you summarize this article?

"This month's case is a bit different from our typical medical malpractice case, but no less important. The physician in this case responded to a lawful subpoena and was fired from his job because of it. Was this legitimate, and what should you do if you receive a subpoena for patient records?

Facts of the Case

Dr T was an internal medicine specialist. He co-owned a concierge medical practice with his partner, Dr M, which they opened in 2005. Patients paid an annual fee for 24/7 access to the doctors. In 2010, Dr T and Dr M signed an employment contract with a large health system to expand their medical practice. The health system agreed to provide medical malpractice insurance for both physicians, but it had no ownership stake in the doctors' private practice.

For a decade, everything was fine. Then, in the spring of 2020, Dr T received a subpoena from the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) for medical records of a patient treated at the health system. The physician had never been served with a subpoena before and was unsure what to do, so he contacted his attorney.

The attorney verified that the subpoena was valid and told Dr T to provide the requested material for the patient that was being investigated. The subpoena was very clear that the information must be kept confidential, so Dr T provided the records to the government, but did not alert the health system about the subpoena.

The DEA noticed that the medical records were from the health system, prompting them to contact the health system for additional records. The health system launched an investigation and discovered that Dr T had responded to the subpoena without notifying it, something it claimed was a violation of his employment contract.

Administrators at the health system called a meeting with Dr T and claimed that they should have been informed that Dr T was the subject of a DEA investigation. Dr T assured them that as far as he was aware, he was not the subject of any investigation, but rather the DEA just wanted some patient records.

Nevertheless, the next day, the health system terminated Dr T's employment contract, and cancelled his medical malpractice insurance, hindering his ability to treat patients. Tensions with the health system continued to escalate when it would not provide Dr T's partner with medical malpractice insurance to treat Dr T's patients. Dr T was finally able to get medical malpractice insurance the following month and to begin practicing again, but he believed that the health system was continuing to obstruct his ability to treat his patients by, for example, ignoring his requests for patient lab results.

The Lawsuit

Dr T consulted with his attorney who advised him to sue the health system for breach of contract and tortious interference with his business relationships. He sought damages for the losses he had suffered as a result of his wrongful termination from the health system.

Dr T claimed that he had no knowledge of any investigation of him by the DEA and thus he had no duty to inform the health system of the subpoena according to his employment contract. He argued that even if he did have such an obligation, the health system was still required to give him notice and a 10-day window to correct the situation. Since the health system did not do this, Dr T maintained that it had breached the employment contract.

The health system defended itself by claiming it had done nothing wrong, and that Dr T had a clear duty to inform it of the subpoena and obtain permission before releasing patient records. It argued that Dr T's failure to do so justified his termination.

The Jury Trial

The case went to trial in front of a jury. The trial lasted for 4 days. After deliberation, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Dr T. The jury awarded the physician $300,000 for the breach of contract claim and $1,750,000 for the claim of tortious interference, bringing his total award to $2,050,000. The jury held that the health system had unfairly damaged Dr T's reputation and financial security without cause.

Legal Background

A subpoena is a legal document commanding the appearance of an individual, or the production of specified items. A subpoena should not be ignored as failure to respond to one is punishable by contempt of court or of the agency issuing the subpoena. Punishment for failing to respond can include monetary fines, and even imprisonment (although this is extremely rare). Typically, there are 3 commonly used types of subpoenas: subpoena duces tecum (which is used to compel production of documents and records), deposition subpoena (to compel someone to sit for a deposition) and witness subpoena (to compel someone to appear in court to testify).

Ignoring a subpoena will not make it go away but can subject you to punishment. So, what do you do if you do not want to respond to a subpoena? The general way is to file a motion to quash the subpoena. The motion must state the reasons why compliance with the subpoena should not be required, or why the subpoena's scope should be limited. The motion must be filed with a judge and served on the other party. The court will then decide if the relevance of the information sought by the subpoena outweighs the objections.

Protecting Yourself

Dr T received subpoenas for medical records from the DEA but was not told that it was related to an investigation into his prescribing practices, and he had no reason to believe that the DEA was investigating him. Thus, he had no obligation to report to the health system that he was under investigation.

The health system seemingly jumped to the conclusion that he was being investigated and terminated his employment without a grace period or an investigation into the circumstances. Dr T did the right thing by consulting with an attorney when he was served with the subpoena. It would be wise, if served with a subpoena, to have it looked over by your attorney to help you understand the scope of what it encompasses, and whether and how you need to respond to it."