This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Torts
Invasion of Privacy
Patient's Privacy Rights

Kenneth P. Stoller, M.D., JK being the mother of a vaccine exempt child v. Dennis Herrera, in his official capacity as the City Attorney of the City of San Francisco, The City and County of San Francisco, Kimberly Kirchmeyer, in her official capacity as Executive Director, Medical Board of California, Christopher Shultz, in his official capacity as Chief Deputy Director of the California Department of Consumer Affairs, and John and Jane Does 1 through 5 and Robert Schechter in his official capacity of Chief of the Clinical Policy and Support Section ("CPSS") of the California Department of Public Health, Immunization Branch

Published: Feb. 21, 2020 | Result Date: Dec. 3, 2019 | Filing Date: Jul. 15, 2019 |

Case number: CGC-19-576439 Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Judge

Richard B. Ulmer Jr.

Court

San Francisco County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Richard A. Jaffe
(Richard A. Jaffe, Esq.)


Defendant

Lawrence A. Mercer
(Office of the Attorney General)


Facts

Kenneth P. Stoller filed a lawsuit against various public health officials, including the Medical Board of California, challenging an investigation into vaccine exemptions Dr. Stoller issued.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that his vaccine exemptions were appropriate and lawful. Plaintiff contended that the investigation was an invasion of privacy and an attempt to intimidate him into denying otherwise lawful vaccine exemptions.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendants contended the matter was currently under review as a disciplinary action before the Medical Board of California. Defendants characterized plaintiff's action as an attempt to circumvent the administrative process. Defendant contended that the action must be dismissed because plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies.

Result

The court dismissed the matter due to plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies.


#133920

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390