Aetna Sues Plaintiffs Firm, Consumer Watchdog in HIV Patient Privacy Debacle
The insurance giant was originally sued in federal court in Philadelphia after it mailed notifications to patients about how to fill their HIV drug prescriptions that clearly identified them in envelope windows.
May 25, 2018 at 01:32 PM
3 minute read
Aetna has sued a plaintiffs firm and a consumer group in connection with a compounded privacy blunder that outed HIV patients and forced the company to pay out $17 million to those affected.
The insurance giant was originally sued in federal court in Philadelphia after it mailed notifications to patients about how to fill their HIV drug prescriptions that clearly identified them in envelope windows.
“Rather than sending instructions about how people taking HIV medications could fill their prescriptions in an opaque envelope, Aetna … instead sent this highly sensitive information in an envelope with a large transparent glassine window,” the first complaint against Aetna said.
After that matter settled, Aetna was hit with another suit for allegedly exposing patients' confidential information a second time when settlement notifications were sent out to potential class members in envelopes with transparent windows.
Now, Aetna is going after plaintiffs firm Whatley Kallas and the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog, which represented the class members, alleging they were responsible for sending out the mailings that led to the second breach.
Aetna's complaint consists of four counts: implied indemnity, equitable indemnity/comparative negligence, the right of contribution, and declaratory relief.
The insurer is demanding that the Whatley firm and the consumer group “defend, indemnify, and/or hold Aetna harmless from and against any liability, damages, payments, penalties, claims, losses, and costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, related to the incident, the underlying actions, and the investigation.”
The Whatley firm did not respond to a request for comment.
Consumer Watchdog denounced the lawsuit in a May 22 letter to Aetna.
“Since Aetna and its various outside counsel first suggested in August 2017 that lawyers for Consumer Watchdog and Whatley Kallas LLP were somehow responsible for its most recent privacy breach, we have emphatically disputed both the factual and legal basis for this assertion, citing communications with Aetna in our and your possession as well as documents from [claims administrator Kurtzman Carson Consultants] unequivocally establishing that Aetna and its outside counsel are solely responsible for the breach,” the letter said. “On multiple separate occasions, we have requested Aetna provide any evidence in its possession pertaining to such a claim, and we have explained how the factual bases for such claims are demonstrably false.”
In February, Aetna filed a federal lawsuit in Philadelphia against KCC, the claims administrator, blaming it for the second breach.
But the administrator, in turn, sued Aetna in California, charging that the insurer and its agent, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, committed negligence and breach of contract for “failure to adequately safeguard the protected health information of thousands of Aetna insureds.” Gibson Dunn was not named as a defendant in the lawsuit, however.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPa. High Court to Weigh Parent Company's Liability for Dissolved Subsidiary's Conduct
3 minute readPa. Supreme Court Taps New Philadelphia Family Division Administrative Judge
3 minute readPeople in the News—Nov. 27, 2024—Flaster Greenberg, Tucker Arensberg
3 minute readLaw Firm Associates, Staffers Continue to Put a Premium On Workplace Flexibility, Study Finds
Trending Stories
- 1Hagens Berman Accused of Withholding Share of $13M Award in Pharmaceutical Settlement
- 2What to Know About Naming a Law Firm
- 3Texas Shows the Way Forward in Resolving Mass Tort Gridlock
- 4Ninth Circuit Rules on Inherent Authority and FRCP 37(e)
- 5Where CFPB Enforcement Stops Short on Curbing School Lunch Fees, Class Action Complaint Steps Up
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250