Client Confidentiality in the Digital AgeBy Ed FinkelMay 2015Article, Page 20The pathways for breaching client confidentiality - whether due to simple carelessness or inadequate security - continue to multiply as technology advances.
Evaluating Protective Orders for Discovery MaterialsBy Jo Anna PollockNovember 2011Article, Page 576Litigants often seek protective orders to limit disclosure of clients' sensitive documents during discovery. But be wary of attempts by the requesting party to gain an unfair advantage.
Subpoena for medical recordsJanuary 2009Illinois Law Update, Page 16On October 31, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, reversed the judgment of the Circuit Court of Logan County denying the state's request for a subpoena duces tecum, seeking release of a defendant's medical records for the day the defendant was charged with driving under the influence (DUI).
The Open Meetings Act v. client confidentialityBy Helen W. GunnarssonOctober 2008LawPulse, Page 498A trial court's search for truth and the public's right to know may conflict with what local governments believe to be their right to confidential communications with counsel.
Employers’ liability for employees’ loose tonguesBy Helen W. GunnarssonJuly 2006LawPulse, Page 338The Illinois Supreme Court will review an appellate court's ruling that a hospital employee has a "continuing off-shift duty" to keep confidential information about patients confidential.
Danger lurks in p.i. confidentiality clausesBy Helen W. GunnarssonMarch 2006LawPulse, Page 110A recent case – involving none other than Dennis Rodman – holds that plaintiffs must pay tax on the portion of a settlement award deemed payment to a p.i. client for his or her silence.
Bar associations, U.S. reps seek exemptions for lawyers from Gramm-Leach-BlileyBy Helen W. GunnarssonDecember 2002LawPulse, Page 628The New York State and American Bar Associations have filed lawsuits seeking declaratory judgments that the FTC's application of GLBA's privacy provisions to practicing attorneys is unlawful, and members of Congress have introduced legislation that would exempt lawyers from the Act.