These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11648501)

  • 1. Smith v. Superior Court.
    California. Court of Appeal
    Wests Calif Report; 1981 Apr; 173():136-42. PubMed ID: 11648501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Attorney work product privilege trumps mandated child abuse reporting law: The case of Elijah W. v. Superior Court.
    Lareau CR
    Int J Law Psychiatry; 2015; 42-43():43-8. PubMed ID: 26404507
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The psychotherapist-patient privilege in Washington: extending the privilege to community mental health clinics.
    Hague WW
    Wash Law Rev; 1983 Jul; 58(3):565-86. PubMed ID: 11658506
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. In re Rules Adoption Regarding Inmate-Therapist Confidentiality.
    New Jersey. Superior Court, Appellate Division
    Atl Report; 1988 Apr; 540():212-8. PubMed ID: 11648569
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Jordan v. Kelly; Jordan v. Mack.
    U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit
    Fed Report; 1984 Feb; 728():1-4. PubMed ID: 11648500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Rationales for the confidentiality of psychotherapist-patient communications: testimonial privilege and the Constitution.
    Courville CP
    Houst Law Rev; 1998; 35(1):187-226. PubMed ID: 14628847
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Commonwealth v. Kobrin.
    Massachusetts. Supreme Judicial Court, Suffolk
    North East Rep Second Ser; 1985 Jul; 479():674-82. PubMed ID: 12041200
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. MacDonald v. Clinger.
    New York. Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department
    Rep Cases Decided Appell Div Supreme Court State NY NY State Supreme Court Appell Div; 1982 Jan; 84():482-90. PubMed ID: 12041100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. State v. Andring.
    Minnesota. Supreme Court
    Wests North West Rep; 1984 Jan; 342():128-35. PubMed ID: 12041156
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evidence law--the psychotherapist-patient privilege in federal courts.
    Cerveny K; Kent MJ
    Notre Dame Law Rev; 1984; 59(3):791-816. PubMed ID: 11658789
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The psychotherapist-client testimonial privilege: defining the professional involved.
    Dubbelday CJ
    Emory Law J; 1985; 34(3-4):777-826. PubMed ID: 11658791
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The psychotherapist-patient privilege: are some patients more privileged than others?
    Stroube MK
    Pac Law J; 1979 Jul; 10(2):801-24. PubMed ID: 11661824
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Privacy, confidentiality, and autonomy in psychotherapy.
    Winslade WJ; Ross JW
    Neb Law Rev; 1985; 64(4):578-636. PubMed ID: 11649806
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Empirical support for the United States Supreme Court's protection of the psychotherapist-patient privilege.
    Marsh JE
    Ethics Behav; 2003; 13(4):385-400. PubMed ID: 15000103
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. W v. Egdell.
    Great Britain. England. Court of Appeal, Civil Division
    All Engl Law Rep; 1989 Nov; [1990] 1():835-53. PubMed ID: 11648630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The privilege study: an empirical examination of the psychotherapist-patient privilege.
    Shuman DW; Weiner MS
    North Carol Law Rev; 1982 Jun; 60(5):893-942. PubMed ID: 11658717
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. In re Zuniga.
    U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
    Fed Report; 1983 Aug; 714():632-42. PubMed ID: 11648208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Privileged communications of psychologists.
    DeKraai MB; Sales BD
    Prof Psychol; 1982 Jun; 13(3):372-88. PubMed ID: 11653564
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Correction to "Empirical support for the United States Supreme Court's protection of the psychotherapist-patient privilege".
    Marsh JE
    Ethics Behav; 2004; 14(2):197-9. PubMed ID: 15835047
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. In re Troy D.
    California. Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 1
    Wests Calif Report; 1989 Nov; 263():869-78. PubMed ID: 11648215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.