Cannady v. St. Vincent Infirmary Medical Center
423 S.W.3d 548
Ark.2012Background
- Appellant, as administratrix of Anne Pressly's estate, sued St. Vincent Infirmary Medical Center and others for invasion of privacy and outrage.
- Allegations: defendants accessed Pressly's medical records without legitimate reason and St. Vincent allegedly failed to restrict access in its system.
- Amended complaint added that three defendants pled guilty to wrongful disclosure of health information under 42 U.S.C. § 1320(d).
- Circuit court granted summary judgment, holding no survival for invasion of privacy or outrage and no vicarious liability for St. Vincent.
- Arkansas survival statute Ark. Code Ann. § 16-62-101(a)(1) was a central issue; court aligned with Restatement of Torts and Ward on survival limits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does invasion of privacy survive decedent's death? | Cannady argues intrusion survives under § 16-62-101. | St. Vincent contends § 16-62-101 does not extend to intrusion; Ward/respectively limits survive. | No survival; intrusion cannot survive death. |
| Does outrage survive or qualify as relational wrong by survivors? | Outrage is distinct from intrusion and may be pursued personally by Cannady. | Outrage premised on invasion; cannot be pursued as relational or survive death. | Outrage does not survive as a relational wrong and is not barred from remand; reversed and remanded. |
| Can St. Vincent be vicariously liable for employees' conduct if invasion and outrage claims fail? | Liability may lie if actions constituted outrageous intrusion by employees. | No vicarious liability if primary claims fail. | Reversed and remanded on vicarious liability related to outrage. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ward v. Blackwood, 41 Ark. 295 (1888) (construction of survival statute and exceptions for personal injuries)
- Arkansas Life Ins. Co. v. American National Life Ins. Co., 110 Ark. 130 (1913) (actions for slander/libel do not survive; injuries of physical character survive)
- Reid v. Pierce County, 136 Wash.2d 195 (1998) (privacy rights of decedent's immediate relatives in autopsy/publication of photos)
- Parkerson v. Carrouth, 782 F.2d 1449 (8th Cir. 1986) (cited with Ward and American Life; survival analysis akin to Ward)
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Lee, 348 Ark. 707 (2002) ( Restatement-based intrusion analysis and privacy expectations)