Tyquan Stewart v. Parkview Hospital
940 F.3d 1013
| 7th Cir. | 2019Background
- Stewart crashed his car while intoxicated, was treated in the ER, and a physician ordered a blood draw for medical/diagnostic purposes.
- Stewart reports being unconscious in the hospital; the treating physician said Stewart admitted drinking and signed a consent-to-treatment form.
- Indiana law required medical staff to disclose diagnostic blood-test results to law enforcement on request; nurses gave the police the results, which showed intoxication.
- Police arrested Stewart; he was charged with operating a vehicle while intoxicated and pleaded guilty.
- Stewart sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging (1) a Fourth Amendment violation by officers who obtained the results without a warrant and (2) that hospital staff violated HIPAA by disclosing results; he also asserted several state-law claims.
- The district court granted summary judgment for defendants; on appeal the Seventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether HIPAA creates a private right of action | HIPAA's privacy protections were violated and should be privately enforceable | HIPAA contains no express private remedy; enforcement delegated to HHS, so no private right | No private right; HIPAA confers no private cause of action |
| Whether officers violated the Fourth Amendment by obtaining blood-test results without a warrant | Receipt of hospital blood-test results from medical staff was a warrantless seizure of medical evidence violating the Fourth Amendment | Officers reasonably relied on hospital disclosure and state law; prior case law permits warrantless blood testing in crash contexts; qualified immunity applies | Officers entitled to qualified immunity; not clearly established that receiving such results was unconstitutional |
| Municipal liability (Monell) for City of Fort Wayne | City liable for officers’ constitutional violation | No municipal policy or custom alleged to cause violation | Claim against City fails for lack of municipal policy/custom allegation |
| State-law claims (negligence, battery, invasion of privacy, etc.) | District court erred in dismissing state claims | Plaintiff failed to point to evidence raising a triable issue | Plaintiff waived challenge on appeal by not identifying record evidence; summary judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Ziglar v. Abbasi, 137 S. Ct. 1843 (addressing limits on implied causes of action and remedies)
- Acara v. Banks, 470 F.3d 569 (5th Cir.) (holding HIPAA does not create a private right)
- Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (tool for determining whether statutes create private rights)
- Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (permitting warrantless blood draws under exigent circumstances)
- Mitchell v. Wisconsin, 139 S. Ct. 2525 (permitting warrantless blood draws from unconscious drivers)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (standard for clearly established law in qualified immunity analyses)
- Kisela v. Hughes, 138 S. Ct. 1148 (clarifying qualified immunity and clearly established rights)
- Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs., 436 U.S. 658 (municipal liability requires an unconstitutional policy or custom)