A. Upon receipt of an application for review, the commission's director or his delegate shall cause to be served a true copy of the application on the health care providers involved. Service shall be effected pursuant to New Mexico law. If the health care provider involved chooses to retain legal counsel, his attorney shall informally enter his appearance with the director.

B. The health care provider shall answer the application for review and in addition shall submit a statement authorizing the panel to obtain access to all medical and hospital records and information pertaining to the matter giving rise to the application, and, for the purposes of its consideration of the matter only, waiving any claim of privilege as to the contents of those records. Nothing in that statement shall in any way be construed as waiving that privilege for any other purpose or in any other context, in or out of court.

C. In instances where applications are received employing the theory of respondeat superior or some other derivative theory of recovery, the director shall forward such applications to the state professional societies, associations or licensing boards of both the individual health care provider whose alleged malpractice caused the application to be filed, and the health care provider named a respondent as employer, master or principal.

History: 1953 Comp., § 58-33-16, enacted by Laws 1976, ch. 2, § 16.

Emergency clauses. — Laws 1976, ch. 2, § 32 contained an emergency clause and was approved February 27, 1976.

Limitation on authority of director. — The director does not have any discretion to redact an applicant's legal claims or factual averments in a medical malpractice action from an application to the commission. Kucel v. N.M. Med. Review Comm'n, 2000-NMCA-026, 128 N.M. 691, 997 P.2d 823, cert. denied, 128 N.M. 688, 997 P.2d 820.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 70 C.J.S. Physicians and Surgeons §§ 110 to 113.