DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Identity theft, privacy and information security — executive coaching (part 3)

Posted on May 21, 2009 by Dissent

In this article, Joe Campana discusses safe harbor and cites a 2007 Illinois Supreme Court opinion from Bagent v. Blessing Care Corporation, d/b/a Illini Community Hospital (pdf).   Campana writes, in part:

An Illinois Supreme Court Case illustrates safe harbor. A health care employee divulged personal health information of a patient in a conversation with a friend. The friend’s sister, the patient, learned that her health information was shared. The health care organization and employee were both sued. The case was argued in the circuit court, appealed and finally argued before the Illinois Supreme Court.

The various courts recognized that the health care organization had written policies and procedures for protecting patient information, that it trained its employees and had them sign confidentiality agreements. The employee was terminated for violating the privacy policy. The courts considered these facts in determining the liability of the heath care organization. Both the circuit court and Supreme Court held that the organization should not be liable. However, the employee still faced common law charges for violation of the patient’s privacy. This suggests that it is important to educate and train employees because they can be held personally liable when there is a privacy violation.

Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← IRS lax in destroying sensitive tax papers
Iowa Court: proof of disclosure not sufficient to support damages →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Resource: State Data Breach Notification Laws – June 2025
  • WestJet investigates cyberattack disrupting internal systems
  • Plastic surgeons often store nude photos of patients with their identity information. When would we call that “negligent?”
  • India: Servers of two city hospitals hacked; police register FIR
  • Ph: Coop Hospital confirms probe into reported cyberattack
  • Slapped wrists for Financial Conduct Authority staff who emailed work data home
  • School Districts Unaware BoardDocs Software Published Their Private Files
  • A guilty plea in the PowerSchool case still leaves unanswered questions
  • Brussels Parliament hit by cyber-attack
  • Sweden under cyberattack: Prime minister sounds the alarm

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Vermont signs Kids Code into law, faces legal challenges
  • Data Categories and Surveillance Pricing: Ferguson’s Nuanced Approach to Privacy Innovation
  • Anne Wojcicki Wins Bidding for 23andMe
  • Would you — or wouldn’t you?
  • New York passes a bill to prevent AI-fueled disasters
  • Synthetic Data and the Illusion of Privacy: Legal Risks of Using De-Identified AI Training Sets
  • States sue to block the sale of genetic data collected by DNA testing company 23andMe

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.