§ 144.008.Disclosure of Information Subject to Order; Penalty
Title 6. Miscellaneous Provisions · Chapter 144. Destruction of Certain Records · Last amended 1997 · Last verified August 29, 2026
Full Text of § 144.008
Plain-English Summary
The criminal enforcement provision, with two offences and one preservation.
Subsection (a) — the disclosure offence. A person commits an offence if they know of the admission, know of the order, and intentionally release, disseminate, or publish a record or index reference subject to it. All three elements are required, and the mental state is intentional.
Subsection (b) — the failure offence. A person commits an offence if they knowingly fail to delete, seal, destroy, or present to the court a record or index reference subject to an order, and know or should know it is subject to that order.
Note the mixed standard there. The failure must be knowing, but the knowledge that the record is covered may be constructive — knows or should know. An institution cannot rely on not having checked.
"Index reference" appears in both. Destroying a file while leaving it listed in an index would disclose exactly what the chapter conceals.
Both are Class B misdemeanors.
Subsection (d) preserves the legal privilege, and it is a necessary carve-out: an attorney or insurer of a provider or patient may retain or communicate confidentially about a privileged document as necessary to provide legal advice regarding an actual or potential claim. The document and communication remain privileged and not subject to a subpoena.
Without it, a lawyer advising on a claim would face a choice between competent advice and a criminal offence.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is it a crime to disclose these records?
Yes. Intentionally releasing a record or index reference subject to an order, knowing of both the admission and the order, is a Class B misdemeanor.
Is failing to destroy them an offence?
Yes, where the failure is knowing and the person knows or should know the record is subject to the order.
Can a lawyer keep a copy?
Yes. An attorney or insurer may retain and confidentially discuss a privileged document as necessary for legal advice, and it stays privileged and not subject to subpoena.
Amendment History
- Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1295, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1997.