Yath v. Fairview Clinics, N.P.
Minnesota Court of Appeals
767 N.W.2d 34 (2009)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Candace Yath (plaintiff) visited Fairview Clinics, N.P., doing business as Fairview Cedar Ridge Clinic (the Clinic) (defendant), to be treated for a sexually transmitted disease. Navy Tek (defendant), a medical assistant at the Clinic who was related to Yath’s ex-husband, recognized Yath and accessed her medical file without authorization. Tek learned of Yath’s medical diagnosis as well as information related to Yath’s new sex partner and relayed the information to another Clinic employee, Net Phat (defendant), who in turn, disclosed it to others, including Yath’s ex-husband. Subsequently, the Clinic investigated the unauthorized access to Yath’s medical file and eventually fired Tek. Shortly thereafter, a MySpace.com webpage emerged showing Yath’s photo, name, and stating that she had a sexually transmitted disease and had cheated on her spouse. The webpage was created at a business where Tek’s sister, Molyka Mao (defendant), was employed. Yath sued Tek, Mao, Phat, and the Clinic for invasion of privacy, breach of a confidential relationship, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and for violating Minnesota law related to unauthorized disclosure of a person’s medical information. Yath subsequently dismissed the claims against Mao and Tek. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Clinic and Phat. Yath appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ross, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.