DataBreaches.Net

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

Two potential class action lawsuits filed against Sutter Health (updated)

Posted on November 23, 2011 by Dissent

It was only a matter of time, right? Darrell Smith reports:

Sutter Health is being sued for negligence and other allegations in the mid-October theft of a computer from Sutter Medical Foundation headquarters that held information on more than 4 million of its patients.

The class-action suit, filed Monday on behalf of plaintiff Karen Pardieck of Folsom in Sacramento Superior Court, alleges that the Sacramento-based health network was negligent in safeguarding its computers and data and then did not notify the millions of patients whose data went missing within the time required by state law. The suit seeks $1,000 for each member of the class and attorneys’ fees.

Read more on Sacramento Bee.

That was one of two lawsuits filed in the past two weeks. Another law firm issued a press release issued today by another law firm about a lawsuit they filed November 16 in Alameda County Superior Court on behalf of a different plaintiff.

Both lawsuits mention notification within the time required by state law, but I don’t see where the state law actually specifies an exact deadline for notifying. One part of the statute says “immediately” upon discovery, but another part allows the entity needed time to determine the scope of the breach.  I’d be interested in reading that part of both lawsuits to see why they claim a one-month gap between discovery and notification violates California law.

[The preceding post was corrected to add the correct links.]

Update: The complaint filed in Sacramento Superior Court (Pardieck v. Sutter Health) is online, here. The first cause of action is alleged violation of California’s Confidential of Medical Information Act. The second cause of action relates to timeliness of notification and cites California Code 1798.82. I had checked into that section when trying to figure out what the complaint might cite about timeliness of notification, and had noted the confusion within that section. You can read the code here. Yes, Sutter knew quickly that there was an incident, but how long did it take to figure out its scope in terms of how many patients were affected, which patients were affected, and what kinds of data were involved for each patient? I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect any entity to immediately provide individual notice to everyone if they don’t yet know whose data – or which data – are involved.

Category: Health Data

Post navigation

← NJ: Four charged with stealing identities; two were DMV employees
Personal info from more than 500 patients on Web →

2 thoughts on “Two potential class action lawsuits filed against Sutter Health (updated)”

  1. Anonymous says:
    November 26, 2011 at 3:26 pm

    How does my family join in on the class action lawsuit?

    1. Anonymous says:
      November 26, 2011 at 4:12 pm

      If you view the press release, you’ll see info on how people can join that one. If you read the complaint on the other, you can see contact info for the plaintiff’s lawyer(s).

      There will be a slew of lawyers advertising for/recruiting people for potential class actions against Sutter. It is in the lawyers’ economic interest to get a lot of people. Do your due diligence and check out the lawyers’ track records on similar lawsuits before deciding who to sign on with.

      That said, understand that I am not recommending that you join a class action lawsuit. I’m just answering your question.

Comments are closed.

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

  • Lower Merion School District says a data breach was caused by a computer glitch
  • After $1 Million Ransom Demand, Virgin Islands Lottery Restores Operations Without Paying Hackers
  • Junior Defence Contractor Arrested For Leaking Indian Naval Secrets To Suspected Pakistani Spies
  • Mysterious leaker GangExposed outs Conti kingpins in massive ransomware data dump
  • Resource: HoganLovells Asia-Pacific Data, Privacy and Cybersecurity Guide 2025
  • Class action settlement following ransomware attack will cost Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center about $52 million
  • Comstar LLC agrees to corrective action plan and fine to settle HHS OCR charges
  • Australian ransomware victims now must tell the government if they pay up
  • U.S. Sanctions Cloud Provider ‘Funnull’ as Top Source of ‘Pig Butchering’ Scams
  • Victoria’s Secret takes down website after security incident

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

  • Fears Grow Over ICE’s Reach Into Schools
  • Resource: HoganLovells Asia-Pacific Data, Privacy and Cybersecurity Guide 2025
  • She Got an Abortion. So A Texas Cop Used 83,000 Cameras to Track Her Down.
  • Why AI May Be Listening In on Your Next Doctor’s Appointment
  • Watch out for activist judges trying to deprive us of our rights to safe reproductive healthcare
  • Nebraska Bans Minor Social Media Accounts Without Parental Consent
  • Trump Taps Palantir to Compile Data on Americans

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.