George R. Caesar, M.D. v. Louis P. Mountanos, as Sheriff of the County of Marin, State of California

Petitioner, Dr. George R. Caesar, a licensed psychiatrist practicing in California, has appealed from an order denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking to set aside a contempt adjudication and sentence in the California Superior Court, Marin County. 1 He was adjudged in contempt for refusing to obey an order directing him to answer questions relating to communications with a former patient, based on “patient-litigant exception” to the psychotherapist-patient privilege, contained in California Evidence Code § 1016. 2 Petitioner contends that § 1016 violates “rights of privacy, due process and equal protection which exist under the Constitution of the United States”. 3 In a detailed and well reasoned opinion the Supreme Court of California rejected this contention in In Re Lifschutz, 2 Cal.3d 415 , 85 Cal.Rptr. 829 , 467 P.2d 557 , 44 A.L.R.3d 1 (1970), and upheld the validity of § 1016. We agree with the conclusions of the court in In Re Lifschutz and affirm the order of the district court.

Background

In December 1969, Joan Seebach was referred to Dr. Caesar for psychiatric examination and treatment following an automobile accident on December 4, 1969. Dr. Caesar…

(concurring and dissenting):

I part company with In re Lifschutz (1970) 2 Cal.3d 415 , 85 Cal.Rptr. 829 , 467 P.2d 557 , and hence with the majority opinion in this case, only in the holding that California Evidence Code Section 1016, as construed in Lifschutz and applied here, *1071 does not impermissibly encroach upon the patient’s constitutional right of privacy. Lifschutz incorrectly assessed the weight of the patient’s right of privacy as against competing public and private interests in the production of relevant evidence in personal injury litigation; the means adopted in Lifschutz to ameliorate the impact of Section 1016 upon the patient’s right of privacy are not sufficiently sensitive to withstand constitutional scrutiny.

Section 1016 provides that “[tjhere is no privilege under this article as to a communication relevant to an issue concerning the mental or emotional condition of the patient if such issue has been tendered by (a) [t]he patient . . . .” “Confidential communication” is defined in Section 1012 as “information, including information obtained by an examination of the patient, transmitted between a patient and his psychotherapist in the course of that…

542 F.2d 1064 George R. CAESAR, M.D., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Louis P. MOUNTANOS, as Sheriff of the County of Marin, State of California, et al., Respondents-Appellees. No. 74-2271. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Sept. 13, 1976. Kurt W. Melchior (argued), of Severson, Werson, Berke, & Melchior, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner-appellant. James D. Hammond (argued), of Bacon, Stone, O'Brien, & Hammond, San Francisco, Cal., for respondents-appellees. Before KOELSCH and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges, and JAMESON, * District Judge. JAMESON, District Judge: Petitioner, Dr. George R. Caesar, a licensed psychiatrist practicing in California, has appealed from an order denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking to set aside a contempt adjudication and sentence in the California Superior Court, Marin County. 1 He was adjudged in contempt for refusing to obey an order directing him to answer questions relating to communications with a former patient, based on "patient-litigant exception" to the psychotherapist-patient privilege, contained in California Evidence Code § 1016. 2 Petitioner contends that § 1016 violates "rights of privacy, due…