Doe v. Guthrie Clinic, Ltd.
710 F.3d 492
2d Cir.2013Background
- Doe sues Guthrie Defendants over confidential medical information disclosure at Guthrie Clinic Steuben; claim for breach of fiduciary duty of confidentiality against medical corporations for a non-physician employee's ultra vires act.
- Stalbird, a Clinic nurse, texted six messages about Doe's STD to his girlfriend’s sister; Clinic fired her and notified Doe of disclosure.
- Doe's eight claims include fiduciary breach, contract, negligent hiring, and emotional distress; the District Court dismissed all under Rule 12(b)(6).
- Doe appeals challenging dismissal of the fiduciary-duty claim; defendants argue no direct corporate liability for non-physician ultra vires disclosures.
- The panel certifies a determinative New York law question to the New York Court of Appeals and stays resolution on that issue; remaining claims are addressed in a separate order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether NY common law allows direct breach of confidentiality against medical corporations for a non-physician employee's ultra vires disclosure. | Doe argues Doe v. Kaiser supports direct corporate liability. | Guthrie Defendants contend no direct corporate liability; respondeat superior limited to within-employment scope. | Question certified to NY Court of Appeals; undecided pending certification. |
Key Cases Cited
- Doe v. Guthrie Clinic, Ltd., 709 N.Y.S.2d 215 (3d Dep't 2000) (direct corporate liability recognized by Third Department in limited form)
- Burton v. Matteliano, 916 N.Y.S.2d 438 (4th Dep't 2011) (recognizes physician fiduciary duty; not directly on corporate liability for non-physician disclosure)
- Tighe v. Ginsberg, 540 N.Y.S.2d 99 (4th Dep't 1989) (early physician fiduciary duty authority)
- N.X. v. Cabrini Med. Ctr., 765 N.E.2d 844 (N.Y. 2002) (addressed physician conduct; not clearly extending to non-physician corporate liability for confidentiality)
- Doe v. Guthrie Clinic, Ltd., 2012 WL 531026 (W.D.N.Y. 2012) (district decision cited regarding scope of employment; not controlling authority)
