Herman v. Kratche
Ohio Court of Appeals
2006 WL 3240680 (2006)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Herman (plaintiff) received medical treatment from Dr. Kratche (defendant) who worked at a clinic in the Solon Family Health Center (the Clinic) (defendant). On numerous occasions, the Clinic mistakenly sent copies of Herman’s medical treatment records to her employer, Nestle USA, Inc., believing the records were associated with workers’ compensation claims. Even after Herman learned of the unauthorized disclosures and had asked the Clinic to correct the errors, additional disclosures of her medical procedures and examinations were sent by the Clinic to Nestle, including the results of a mammogram screening and billing information incorrectly labeled as a workers’ compensation claim. Herman filed suit against Kratche and the Clinic for unauthorized disclosure, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The trial court granted, without explanation, summary judgment for Kratche. Herman appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (not provided.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
