[farlander]

Don't think so. They didn't disclose this to the *public*. They disclosed it to her. On accident, I'm sure. What, now, Walgreens should pay cause their employees thought her to be nuts and jotted down customer comments in order to better serve he (ie, don't feed the neurosis) ? I say she owes them.

[Theresawithanh]

Walgreen's had every right to make such comments to the employees who may come in contact with her, for their safety, but those comments should not have been made known to her.

Who knows? I am enough of a cynic to think that this is not a true story anyway.

[kingu]

They disclosed it to her.

Her friend, according to later in the article, picked up the prescriptions, thus the comments were disclosed to a third party.

The question, in my mind, is if those entries were done by more than one person, and if they were, if I was a juror, I'd vote for her to pound sand. That she could cause pharmacy personnel to go at least twice to her file and enter warning data about her personality speaks volumes.

If I was Walgreens, I'd be firing a programmer right now for letting those comments appear anywhere near a customer's receipt. Sure, it might have been from a rotten tear job, but still, such comments should have been on the far end of the document if it printed on the same sheet, just to prevent such an occurrence.