Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TexasGurl24

With the quality and policalization of attorneys these days, his opinion is not worth a darn thing.


83 posted on 05/26/2021 8:06:09 AM PDT by falcon99 (qu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: falcon99

He’s not lying. An even bigger problem than HIPAA not applying to non-covered entities is the lack of a right of private action.

“Every district court that has considered this issue is in agreement that the statute does not support a private right of action.” Acara v. Banks, 470 F.3d 569, 571–72 (5th Cir. 2006).

There is no private right of action under HIPAA, express or implied. Meadows v. United Servs., 963 F.3d 240, 242 (2d Cir. 2020).

No private right of action exists under HIPAA in any event, Lucero v. United States, No. 20-1163, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 6308, at *6 (10th Cir. Mar. 4, 2021)

HIPAA does not provide an express or implied private right of action... Kittel v. Advantage Physical Therapy, No. 19-55690, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 1185, at *3 (9th Cir. Jan. 15, 2021).

HIPAA “provides no private right of action.” Webb v. Smart Document Sols., LLC, 499 F.3d 1078, 1081 (9th Cir. 2007).


99 posted on 05/26/2021 9:01:38 AM PDT by TexasGurl24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson