Quantcast

Patient loses appeal in invasion of privacy claim over UPMC nurse's Facebook post

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Sunday, December 22, 2024

Patient loses appeal in invasion of privacy claim over UPMC nurse's Facebook post

State Court
Altoona

HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania Superior Court has dismissed a patient's appeal in a violation of privacy claim against a registered nurse and UPMC Susquehanna.  

The opinion was written by Judge Michael Musmanno and released March 24.

In Cynthia Shaner's complaint, she said Gerilyn Koontz invaded her privacy when posting on social media, "Getting older is such an adventure. Like is this chest pain indigestion or a heart attack? Can't wait to see if I'm alive tomorrow." 

Shaner accused Koontz of accessing her medical records when she was admitted to the hospital overnight with chest pains. She believed the Facebook post was an unlawful publication of her health information and brought forward two claims in her lawsuit: breach of physician-patient confidentiality and invasion of privacy. 

Shaner accused Koontz of improperly accessing her medical information from her computer and posting about it on Facebook. Although Shaner admitted Koontz never mentioned her by name, she described her exact symptoms that were included in her medical records. She said her issues were made public, the post was liked by 39 people, and she was humiliated by it. 

The Lycoming Court of Common Pleas dismissed Shaner's amended complaint on May 14, 2019, to which Shaner appealed less than a month later, asking the Superior Court to look at four issues. They included:

-Whether the trial court made a mistake in finding Shaner did not accuse her physician of disclosing information; 

-That the disclosure of her medical condition was limited to a sexually transmitted disease; 

-Whether a nurse who was not involved in her care who looked at her medical records and posted about it on Facebook, which was seen and forwarded to Shaner by her friends, didn't satisfy the publicity standard for invasion of privacy; and 

-If the post didn't fulfill the element of publication of private fact. 

The Superior Court ultimately found the post never identified Shaner, nor did it include that it was about a patient at UPMC. The court also decided the post didn't disclose a medical condition that would tarnish anyone's character, so it found the trial court made no error in its original decision. 

ORGANIZATIONS IN THIS STORY

More News