DataBreaches.Net

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

Physician-patient privilege waived in fraud probe

Posted on July 6, 2009 by Dissent

An Ohio Supreme Court ruling could erode certain confidentiality protections afforded to patients’ medical records, physicians say.

The case centered on whether a health insurer could discover patient records to support a billing fraud claim it brought against a doctor. Family physician William Schlotterer, DO, objected to providing his patients’ records to Medical Mutual of Ohio, saying the documents were protected by the physician-patient privilege unless the insurer obtained the patients’ consent.

The patients involved were not a party to the lawsuit, and the high court affirmed that, absent patients’ authorization, medical records are generally protected from disclosure under state law. Because Dr. Schlotterer’s patients already consented to release their medical information to Medical Mutual when they signed on for coverage, however, judges found the physician-patient privilege did not apply.

Read more in American Medical News.

The court opinion is available online (pdf). The case is Med. Mut. of Ohio v. Schlotterer.

Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← What About Former Employees?
LOC ID Thief Sentenced to Prison →

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

  • Banks Want SEC to Rescind Cyberattack Disclosure Requirements
  • MathWorks, Creator of MATLAB, Confirms Ransomware Attack
  • Russian hospital programmer gets 14 years for leaking soldier data to Ukraine
  • MSCS board renews contract with PowerSchool while suing them
  • Iranian Man Pleaded Guilty to Role in Robbinhood Ransomware
  • Developments surrounding data breach at Dutch police
  • Estonia launches international search for Moroccan citizen wanted over data theft
  • Now it’s Tiffany: Another LVMH luxury brand hit by hackers
  • Dutch Government: More forms of espionage to be a criminal offence from 15 May onwards
  • B.C. health authority faces class-action lawsuit over 2009 data breach (1)

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

  • The CCPA emerges as a new legal battleground for web tracking litigation
  • U.S. Spy Agencies Are Getting a One-Stop Shop to Buy Your Most Sensitive Personal Data
  • Period Tracking App Users Win Class Status in Google, Meta Suit
  • AI: the Italian Supervisory Authority fines Luka, the U.S. company behind chatbot “Replika,” 5 Million €
  • D.C. Federal Court Rules Termination of Democrat PCLOB Members Is Unlawful
  • Meta may continue to train AI with user data, German court says
  • Widow of slain Saudi journalist can’t pursue surveillance claims against Israeli spyware firm

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.