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.

Insurance
Breach of Contract
Confidentiality of Medical Information Act

Hartford Casualty Insurance Company v. Corcino & Associates, Frank Corcino, Stanford Hospital and Clinics, Multi-Specialty Collection Services LLC

Published: Jul. 4, 2014 | Result Date: Nov. 5, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:13-cv-03728-GAF-JC Summary Judgment –  Defense

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Michelle Bradley

Sonia R. Martin
(Dentons US LLP)

Michael Barnes


Defendant

Matthew P. Tyson

Janice Y. Walshok

Kenneth N. Greenfield
(The Greenfield Law Firm)

Jeffrey A. Kiburtz
(Covington & Burling LLP)


Facts

Hartford Casualty Insurance Co. sued Corcino & Associates, Frank Corcino, Stanford Hospital and Clinics, and Multi-Specialty Collection Services LLC, in connection with an insurance dispute.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Hartford alleged that it issued a policy on Corcino & Associates, and that Corcino was the named insured person under the policy as a member or employee of Corcino. Hartford alleged that the policy provided, among other benefits, commercial general liability coverage, including personal and advertising coverage with a limit of $2 - $4 million.

Hartford alleged that on Sept. 28, 2011, Shana Springer filed a putative class action against Stanford Hospital, naming Corcino, Stanford, and Multi-Specialty as defendants. The underlying action alleged that Stanford disclosed confidential medical information regarding approximately 20,000 of its patients to Multi-Specialty and Corcino& Associates so Corcino could market its and Multi-Specialty's ability to provide auditing services to Stanford. In response, Stanford and Multi-Specialty filed a cross-complaint against Corcino and Corcino& Associates for contribution, indemnity, and/or other relief. Another lawsuit, the Sherald action, was filed against Stanford alleging the same disclosure of personal medical information at issue in the prior lawsuit. Again, Stanford and Multi-Specialty cross-complained against Corcino for contribution and/or indemnity. Hartford alleged that it was currently defending Corcino in those underlying actions.

Result

The court entered judgment in favor of defendants.

Other Information

FILING DATE: May 23, 2013.


#82901

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

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