DataBreaches.Net

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

University of California wins appeal in data breach lawsuit; plaintiff couldn't prove data were viewed or accessed

Posted on October 16, 2013 by Dissent

An update on a lawsuit that followed this breach involving a stolen hard drive with encrypted PHI on over 16,000 UCLA patients.

Law360.com reports:

A California appeals court on Tuesday found that the University of California’s Board of Regents couldn’t be held liable for disclosure when they lost a hard drive with a woman’s medical information on it because the disclosure itself could not be proven.

Plaintiff Melinda Platter filed suit in Los Angeles Superior Court in October 2012 alleging the university’s board had breached the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act when it lost the hard drive containing her medical information.

Read more on Law360.com (subscription required).

You can read the court’s opinion here (pdf). From that ruling (emphasis added by PHIprivacy.net):

Ruling a damage claim may be stated under section 56.101, subdivision (a), based on a health care provider?s negligent maintenance or storage of an individual?s medical information without regard to whether it resulted in any actual release or disclosure of the information, respondent Los Angeles Superior Court overruled the Regents?s demurrer to Platter?s complaint. Although we do not agree with the Regents?s argument an affirmative communicative act by the health care provider is an essential element of Platter?s claim, we hold, by incorporating the remedy specified in section 56.36, subdivision (b), section 56.101 allows a private right of action for negligent maintenance only when such negligence results in unauthorized or wrongful access to the information. Because Platter cannot allege her information was improperly viewed or otherwise accessed, we grant the Regents?s petition and issue a writ of mandate to the superior court directing it to vacate its order overruling the Regents?s demurrer and to enter a new order sustaining the demurrer without leave to amend and dismissing the action.

The California Medical Association had filed an amicus brief in the appeal.


Related:

  • Two U.K. teenagers appear in court over Transport of London cyber attack
  • ModMed revealed they were victims of a cyberattack in July. Then some data showed up for sale.
  • JFL Lost Up to $800,000 Weekly After Cyberattack, CEO Says No Patient or Staff Data Was Compromised
  • Massachusetts hospitals Heywood, Athol say outage was a cybersecurity incident
  • Heritage Provider Network $49.99M Class Action Settlement
  • Integris Health Agrees to $30 Million Settlement Over 2023 Data Breach
Category: Health Data

Post navigation

← Man charged in TSYS identity theft violated computer policy at Paragon Benefits
News Corp Australia statement →

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

  • District of Massachusetts Allows Higher-Ed Student Data Breach Claims to Survive
  • End of the game for cybercrime infrastructure: 1025 servers taken down
  • Doctor Alliance Data Breach: 353GB of Patient Files Allegedly Compromised, Ransom Demanded
  • St. Thomas Brushed Off Red Flags Before Dark-Web Data Dump Rocks Houston
  • A Wiltshire police breach posed possible safety concerns for violent crime victims as well as prison officers
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Almost two years later, Alpha Omega Winery notifies those affected by a data breach.
  • Court of Appeal reaffirms MFSA liability in data leak case, orders regulator to shoulder costs
  • A jailed hacking kingpin reveals all about the gang that left a trail of destruction
  • Army gynecologist took secret videos of patients during intimate exams, lawsuit says

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

  • As shoplifting surges, British retailers roll out ‘invasive’ facial recognition tools
  • Data broker Kochava agrees to change business practices to settle lawsuit
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Changes in the Rules for Disclosure for Substance Use Disorder Treatment Records: 42 CFR Part 2: What Changed, Why It Matters, and How It Aligns with HIPAAs
  • Always watching: How ICE’s plan to monitor social media 24/7 threatens privacy and civic participation

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net
Security Issue: security[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.