The Indiana Court of Appeals recently issued its decision on the F.B.C. v MDwise, Inc. case. In this case, F.B.C. filed a suit against her health insurance company alleging “disclosure,” “intrusion,” and “outrage” after her husband saw personal information that was placed on a web portal and decided to continue with their divorce process. The trial court dismissed all claims except outrage; however, the Court of Appeals decided to dismiss all three claims. Judge Brown concurred, and Judge Bailey dissented with opinion.
Atlanta’s John Marshall Law School professor Elizabeth Jaffe was quoted in a footnote by Judge Bailey for his dissenting opinion. The footnote used is based upon an article written by Professor Jaffe in which she discusses a cyberbullying case that dealt with an invasion of privacy and disclosing personal information. This article supports Judge Bailey’s dissent surrounding the disclosure claim.
The footnote reads:
“See also Elizabeth M. Jaffe, Cyberbullies Beware: Reconsidering Vosburg v. Putney in the Internet Age, 5 Charleston L. Rev. 379, 382-85 (2011) (noting the tort implications of tragic events involving a college student who committed suicide after his roommate used a computer camera to spy on the student’s sexual encounters, revealed the student’s sexual orientation in a post on social media, and shared a link that allowed third parties to remotely view the camera feed).”