Turley v. Univ. of Cincinnati Med. Ctr.
2016 Ohio 7457
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Plaintiff Shawntelle Turley was an inpatient at University of Cincinnati Medical Center (UCMC/UC Health). She kept her diagnosis confidential while hospitalized.
- Turley alleges Raphael Bradley (father of her unborn child) obtained and read her medical-file contents to her after discharge and a screenshot of her record was posted and emailed on a local Facebook group.
- Turley sued hospital employee Ryan Rawls for unauthorized disclosure of nonpublic medical records and related torts, and sued UCMC/UC Health under respondeat superior for Rawls’s conduct.
- UCMC/UC Health moved for summary judgment, submitting the affidavit of Craig Cain (VP, Revenue Cycle) stating an internal investigation found Rawls (a financial-services employee) accessed Turley’s protected health information for nonjob-related reasons and that the access/disclosure was outside the scope of her employment; Cain attached Rawls’s signed Confidentiality and Data Security Agreement.
- Turley opposed with her affidavit recounting Bradley’s threats, Bradley’s alleged disclosure, and the online/e-mail dissemination; she did not (below) object to Cain’s affidavit on Civil Rule 56(E) grounds.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for UCMC/UC Health; Turley appealed, arguing factual disputes remained about scope of employment and challenging Cain’s affidavit admissibility.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the hospital is liable under respondeat superior for Rawls’s disclosure | Turley: factual dispute exists that Rawls acted within scope of employment when accessing/disclosing records | Hospital: Cain’s affidavit and investigation show access was intentional, unrelated to hospital business, and outside scope of employment | Court: Summary judgment affirmed — no genuine issue; employer not liable |
| Admissibility of Cain’s affidavit on summary judgment | Turley: affidavit failed to comply with Civ.R. 56(E) and should not be relied upon | Hospital: affidavit was properly considered; plaintiff failed to object below | Court: Turley forfeited the objection by not raising it below and made no plain-error claim; court could consider the affidavit |
| Whether the Confidentiality Agreement creates a fact issue on scope | Turley: signed agreement indicates Rawls had access, creating a factual dispute about whether access was job-related | Hospital: agreement only acknowledges potential access to confidential info, does not show the challenged access was within job duties | Court: Agreement did not create a genuine issue material to scope-of-employment question |
| Burden on summary judgment parties | Turley: rebuttal evidence suffices to require trial | Hospital: dispositive evidence met movant’s burden; Turley failed to identify specific contrary facts | Court: Hospital met its Dresher burden; Turley failed to meet reciprocal burden; summary judgment proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Grafton v. Ohio Edison Co., 77 Ohio St.3d 102 (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (movant’s and nonmovant’s burdens on Civ.R. 56)
- Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 (respondeat superior — tort must be within scope of employment)
- Goldfuss v. Davidson, 79 Ohio St.3d 116 (plain-error standard in civil cases)