Opinion
March 22, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (James O'Donoghue, J.).
While defendant physician's cavalier attitude in providing admittedly careless and contradictory testimony, called "negligent testimony", which he seeks to blame on the representations allegedly made to him by counsel for both sides, is hardly commendable, no action lies against him for breach of plaintiff patient's confidentiality (see, Tiborsky v Martorella, 188 A.D.2d 795, 796-797), plaintiffs having waived confidentiality by affirmatively placing the insured patient's medical condition in issue in seeking to enjoin the reduction of insurance benefits (see, Dillenbeck v. Hess, 73 N.Y.2d 278, 287).
We have considered plaintiffs' other contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Kupferman, Rubin and Williams, JJ.