Surviving spouse permitted access to decedent’s medical records under HIPAA
The Georgia Supreme Court has found state law does not preempt HIPAA regarding a surviving spouse’s ability to access her dead husband’s medical records. In the case, the surviving spouse sought medical records from a nursing home as part of a possible wrongful death action. The nursing home denied the request, contending that under HIPAA, the records only could be released to a permanent administrator or executor of the estate. Finding that Georgia statutory law permits a surviving spouse to file suit on behalf of the deceased spouse, the court concluded that HIPAA’s regulation allowing an authorized person to act on behalf of the deceased person “under applicable law” was sufficient to allow access to the medical records. In so doing, the court rejected the contention that the HIPAA regulation preempts Georgia state law, noting that HIPAA does not preempt any state law which provides more stringent disclosure requirements and that the Georgia law limited disclosure of only certain records to the surviving spouse while the HIPAA regulation permits any executor, administrator, or authorized person to have access to protected health information. In a dissent, Justice Melton of the Georgia Supreme Court concluded that the surviving spouse was acting on her own behalf in pursuing a wrongful death claim which was unrelated to any authority to act on behalf of her deceased husband.
Tip: Note that state statutes governing protected health data which are more restrictive than the HIPAA regulations are likely to be upheld.
Popular related articles
-
In the late 1980s, Clemens Franek sought and received trademark registration status for his "radical" round beach towel.
-
Plaintiff IDG USA, LLC (“IDG”), a Georgia company with its principal place of business in North Carolina, commenced an action against a former employee, Kevin J. Schupp (“Schupp”), a New York resident, alleging breaches of a Non-Compete Agreement, breach of a Confidentiality Agreement, unfair competition, and theft of trade secrets.
-
A 10-year employee accounting manager systematically transfers amounts via ACH to her personal checking account.
-
On August 11, 2010, a federal court rejected a terminated employee's "cat's paw" argument.
-
Massachusetts recently enacted an economic development statute which contains an important amendment to the Massachusetts Personnel Records Statute, G.L. c. 149, § 52C.
-
On August 11, 2010, a federal court rejected a terminated employee's "cat's paw" argument.
-
On July 14, 2010, Secretary Kathleen Sebelius of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published notice in the Federal Register of proposed rulemaking1 aimed at "strengthening" the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) privacy, security and enforcement regulations (collectively referred to as the "HIPAA Rules") and as required by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act), which was enacted as a part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
-
In the last two months, the Department of Labor, the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Health and Human Services published three additional sets of interim final regulations to address compliance requirements in the first significant round of changes to impact group health plans under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).
-
The health reform law requires non-grandfathered group health plans to meet new standards for processing internal claims and appeals, and also requires these plans to implement a new external review procedure.
-
On July 19, 2010, the United States Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor and Treasury issued interim final regulations covering the mandates under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended (the "Health Care Reform Act"), relating to the internal and external claims review process.
-
On August 18, 2010, a complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleging that Specific Media, Inc. violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, as well as state privacy and computer security laws, by failing to provide adequate notice regarding its online tracking practices.
-
The Information Commissioner has recently issued guidance, specifically aimed at Local Education Authorities and those working within the education sector, addressing the confusion surrounding the taking of photographs and videos in educational institutions.
-
Increasingly, clubs and pubs are using technology to electronically capture identity information about their customers.
-
On July 14, 2010, Secretary Kathleen Sebelius of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published notice in the Federal Register of proposed rulemaking1 aimed at "strengthening" the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) privacy, security and enforcement regulations (collectively referred to as the "HIPAA Rules") and as required by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH Act), which was enacted as a part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
-
The Financial Services Authority ("FSA") has imposed a fine of £2.27 million on the UK branch of insurance company Zurich for loss of customer data.
-
A recent NSW case has shed useful light on the judicial treatment of misrepresentations in advertising of properties for sale.
-
In the late 1980s, Clemens Franek sought and received trademark registration status for his "radical" round beach towel.
-
An argument over a narrow strip of land has left a mother and son facing massive costs after their case was heard in the Court of Appeal recently.
-
Plaintiff IDG USA, LLC (“IDG”), a Georgia company with its principal place of business in North Carolina, commenced an action against a former employee, Kevin J. Schupp (“Schupp”), a New York resident, alleging breaches of a Non-Compete Agreement, breach of a Confidentiality Agreement, unfair competition, and theft of trade secrets.
-
Set-off effectively allows one person to deduct from sums he owes to another, amounts that the other person owes to him.
-
A complaint was filed on Aug., 12, 2010 in the Superior Court of New Jersey on behalf of a putative class of New Jersey residents alleging that Staples' "buy one get one free" offer violated the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and constituted common law fraud.
-
On August 13th, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the FDIC in an age discrimination case brought by a group of former FDIC employees.
-
The patent-in-suit disclosed a software–based algorithm and method for generating and delivering messages over a phone line during a “ringing signal” period.
-
On August 12th, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence of Sanjay Kumar, the former CEO and Chairman of Computer Associates.
-
On August 20th, the Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court's finding that shares issued by Conseco qualify for the fraud-on-the-market presumption of reliance in a class action securities fraud lawsuit against Conseco's executives.
If you are interested in submitting an article to Lexology, please
contact Andrew Teague at ateague@lexology.com.
