In rules of evidence, further providing for subpoena of records.
Summary
SB 1283 amends Pennsylvania’s rules governing subpoenas for medical records. The bill updates the fee schedule that health care providers, facilities, or their agents may charge before producing records in response to a subpoena, including charges for searching and retrieving records, per-page copying rates, microfilm copies, and postage or delivery costs. It also preserves the rule that no other retrieval, copying, or shipping charges may be imposed without prior approval from the requesting party.
The bill keeps the existing annual inflation adjustment mechanism tied to the Consumer Price Index and the Secretary of Health, and it retains the special cap that if records are requested electronically, the total payment may not exceed $200. The act would take effect 60 days after enactment. In practical terms, the bill affects litigants, attorneys, insurers, health care providers, and record custodians who rely on subpoenaed medical records in civil or other legal proceedings.
Impact
SB 1283 would amend Title 42 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, specifically section 6152 on subpoena of records, by revising the statutory fee amounts for medical record production. It would directly affect the costs that health care providers and facilities may recover when responding to subpoenas, while also setting the limits on what requesting parties must pay for paper, electronic, or microfilm copies. The bill does not change who may subpoena records, but it changes the financial terms under which records must be produced.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the measure appears to be a technical, administrative update rather than a controversial policy change. The structure of the bill suggests a generally practical intent: to modernize or restate fee amounts and preserve existing limits on charges. No opposition or support is documented in the provided materials, so the overall sentiment cannot be assessed from discussion or voting history.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the level of compensation health care providers may charge for producing subpoenaed records versus the cost burden on attorneys, litigants, insurers, and other requesters who need those records. Providers may favor fee recovery for labor and copying costs, while requesters may be concerned about access costs, especially in high-volume litigation. The electronic-records cap and the prohibition on additional charges without prior approval may also be relevant if parties disagree over whether the statutory amounts adequately reflect current administrative costs.
In preliminary provisions, further providing for definitions; in access, further providing for open-records officer and for retention of records; and, in judicial review, further providing for civil penalty.