A worker had allegedly threatened the doctor and the doctor thought the worker was a threat not only to them but to their staff. The doctor made a statement about the threats and his feelings toward the threats, and that statement became part of the worker’s claim file. When the worker filed a lawsuit against the doctor for libel, the doctor claimed that this statement should be privileged and therefore not grounds for a civil libel case.

The plaintiff in this case was injured at work in 2008 and filed for workers’ compensation. His treating doctor released him to full time duty in 2010. He continued to treat the worker until he claimed that the worker had threatened both him and his staff and he said he did not want to treat him anymore. He made these statements in a narrative report that was included in the workers’ compensation claim file.

The worker claimed that the doctor had falsely accused him, and because of the statements he made the worker found it difficult to find a doctor who would treat him and give him the medical care he needed. A trial court initially dismissed the civil suit, saying that the statements the doctor made were part of a medical record and were only relevant to the workers’ compensation claim at hand. As such, they were protected records.

The worker appealed, saying the doctor’s statement were libelous. In his statement the doctor was just recounting his experience and examination of his patient for the purposes of a workers’ compensation claim. This was within his duty as the treating physician and the statements were relevant to the treatment. The court said that even if the statements would be considered false or malicious in other circumstances, they are still privileged if they are:

• Pertinent and material to the relief sought
• Made in good faith in the performance of a legal or moral private duty
• Made in good faith in order to protect the speaker’s interest in a matter in which he is concerned

A Georgia appellate court decided that because it was submitted as part of a workers’ comp claim, that the doctor’s statement was privileged and could not be used in court as evidence for a libel lawsuit. They upheld the trial court’s decision to dismiss the case.