Cordis Corp. v. O'Shea
988 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
A patient filed a medical products liability lawsuit against petitioners a the manufacturer of a drug-eluting stent that was implanted in the patient and the manufacturer’s holding company. The manufacturer and the company petitioned for certiorari review of the denial of their motion to prohibit the patient from disclosing certain discovery to attorneys who were not counsel of record or even counsel in collateral litigation. The manufacturer produced, marketed, distributed and sold the stent. The patient's attorney advised the manufacturer of the patient's intent to disclose documents obtained in discovery to other attorneys. The manufacturer and the company then argued that the public, and attorneys not involved in collateral litigation but who were considering it in the future, did not have a right to access confidential information provided in discovery. The reviewing court found that the patient failed to present grounds for widespread sharing of discovery. He failed to show a need to broadly share the confidential information with counsel not of record and not engaged in collateral litigation. Indeed, counsel requesting the confidential information did not intervene in the case to present any argument to the trial court which justified the alleged need to obtain the discovery sought. All that the patient offered was speculation and opinion on why counsel might have been interested in the discovery for possible future use. The petition for writ of certiorari was granted, and the trial court order allowing the attorney to disclose confidential information to attorneys who were neither counsel of record in the underlying action nor counsel in collateral litigation involving the stent was quashed.