In Ex parte Golden, 628 So. 2d 496 (Ala. 1993), the plaintiff sued a dentist, claiming that the dentist had engaged in a scheme to defraud his patients. The plaintiff sought discovery of similar acts the dentist had allegedly engaged in with other patients. The trial court denied the discovery, and the plaintiff petitioned the Court for a writ of mandamus. The Court denied the petition, holding that, contrary to the plaintiff's claims, her case was governed by the AMLA and, thus, that discovery of such evidence was prohibited by 6-5-551. (628 So. 2d at 498.)