Michael D. Abraham

BartkoZankel appeared in the first hearing related to 11 coordinated class actions

BartkoZankel appeared in the first hearing related to 11 coordinated class actions brought against the firm’s health care provider client for alleged penalties following the theft of a password protected computer in October 2011. The cases raise novel issues regarding what is a release under the Confidentiality of Medical Records Act (CMIA) and the propriety of class treatment for CMIA claims. Robert Bunzel, Michael Abraham and Simon Goodfellow lead the BartkoZankel team. In re Sutter Medical Information Cases, Judicial Council Coordination No. 4698, Sacramento Superior Court.

Restoring CMIA’s Intended Balance

California’s Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA), Civil Code section 56 et seq., carefully balances obligations to handle and dispose of medical information in a manner preserving confidentiality with patients’ CMIA rights of action for nominal or actual damages. Disruption of this balance has recently been threatened by multiple class action lawsuits seeking to dictate privacy procedures and recover millions or, in one case, billions, of dollars from health care providers in response to the theft or loss of electronic databases. View a PDF of the article.

Michael Abraham Continues Role as Update Editor for CEB’s “Alternative Dispute Resolution” Chapter

Michael Abraham continues in his role as the update editor for the chapter titled “Alternative Dispute Resolution” in CEB’s California Real Estate Brokers: Law and Litigation. Updates were provided in April and will be included in CEB’s published supplement.

Michael Abraham is Appointed Update Editor for CEB’s “Class Actions, Data Breach Litigation, and Privacy Concerns Before and During Trial” Chapter

Michael Abraham is a recognized expert in class action privacy litigation.  He has been appointed as the update editor for the chapter titled “Class Actions, Data Breach Litigation, and Privacy Concerns Before and During Trial” in CEB’s Privacy Compliance and Litigation in California.  The updates will be included in CEB’s published supplement.

Michael D. Abraham Publishes Article in California Health Law News on Restoring California’s CMIA Balance

The Winter 2015 edition of California Health Law News (a Publication of the California Society for Healthcare Attorneys), Volume XXXIII, Issue 1, features an article by Michael D. Abraham on “Restoring CMIA’s Intended Balance.” View a PDF of the article.

Michael Abraham Authors CMIA Article Published in Winter 2015 Issue of California Health Law News

March 1, 2015 Michael D. Abraham authored an article concerning California’s Confidentiality of Medical Information Act’s (“CMIA”) intended balance having been restored through three key Court of Appeals decisions.  Each of the Court of Appeal’s decisions cites to briefs filed by this firm and adopts the CMIA statutory interpretation presented by this firm.  The article was published in the Winter 2015 issue of the California Health Law News.  The article concludes that many CMIA actions will be dismissed at the pleading stage or eliminated by summary judgment based on these important decisions. View a PDF copy of the article.

California Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Massive Data Breach Case

October 15, 2014 - The California Supreme Court issued an Order denying plaintiffs’ Petition for Review, thus allowing the California Third District Court of Appeal’s landmark decision in Sutter Health v. Superior Court, No. C072591 (July 21, 2014) to stand with finality, ending 3 years of litigation against the firm’s client Sutter Health. Rob Bunzel, Mike Abraham, Bill Edlund, Simon Goodfellow and Zaneta Butscher successfully represented Sutter. Thirteen consolidated cases that are now dismissed had alleged violations of the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, following an October 2011 theft from a Sutter Health Sacramento administrative building of a password-protected computer containing data for 4 million patients.  The Confidentiality Act, also known as CMIA, presents nominal damages risk by statute of $1,000 per patient.  The class plaintiffs argued Sutter Health could have done more to safeguard the data, and that its “release” was sufficient to state a claim. In 2012 the Court of Appeal issued an extraordinary writ to review the trial court’s decision that had denied Sutter Health’s pleading challenges.  Very few such writs are ever entertained.  The Court of Appeal in July 2014, now upheld by the state Supreme Court, ruled: “plaintiffs have failed to state a cause of action under the Confidentiality Act because they do not allege that the stolen medical information was actually viewed by an unauthorized person.”  The firm is proud to have been of assistance to Sutter Health in this matter.

Firm Launches Lawsuit for Lifetime Chair of Koret Foundation Against other Directors

The firm has filed a significant new lawsuit for Susan Koret against other Koret directors Tad Taube, Richard Greene, Michael Boskin Anita Friedman and Richard Atkinson, seeking relief to benefit the prominent Koret Foundation charity. San Francisco Superior Court No. CGC 14-542069 (October 7, 2014). View pdf of San Francisco Chronicle story. View pdf of Mrs. Koret’s Open Letter to the community.  Mrs. Koret, widow of founder Joseph Koret, alleges the other directors have led the Koret Foundation off track by failing to prioritize gifts to social welfare, the poor in the Bay Area, and Jewish causes here and in Israel.  Instead, the suit contends the Foundation gives millions to organizations affiliated with the other directors, to conservative economic think tanks, and to Eastern Europe.  The suit alleges a corporate culture at the Koret Foundation that is corrupted by many conflicted ties to defendant Taube’s other organizations affecting director duties of loyalty to the Koret Foundation and its mission.  Allegations of contract breach, fiduciary violations, expense abuse and self-dealing are also included in the Complaint.  Mrs. Koret seeks reparations to the Koret Foundation and removal of six board members.  She is committed to repopulating the board with strong civic minded leaders in the Bay Area, a majority of whom should be Jewish given the roots and mission of the Foundation.  Martin Zankel, Rob Bunzel, Mike Abraham, and Zaneta Butscher represent Mrs. Koret, along with George Argyris and Steve Lowenthal of Farella, Braun & Martel LLP.  The other Koret directors are represented by Keker & Van Nest.

Appeals Court Absolves Sutter Health in Data Breach Case

July 21, 2014 - The California Third District Court of Appeal in a published decision today ordered dismissal without leave to amend of thirteen coordinated class action lawsuits filed in late 2011.  Sutter Health v. Superior Court, No. C072591 (July 21, 2014). View full story in pdf format published in The Recorder. Rob Bunzel, Mike Abraham, Bill Edlund, Simon Goodfellow and Zaneta Butscher represented Sutter.  The thirteen cases had alleged violations of the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, following an October 2011 theft from a Sutter Health Sacramento administrative building of a password-protected computer containing data for 4 million patients.  The Confidentiality Act, also known as CMIA,  presents nominal damages risk by statute of $1,000 per patient.  The class plaintiffs argued Sutter Health could have done more to safeguard the data, and that its “release” was sufficient to state a claim. In 2012 the Court of Appeal issued an extraordinary writ to review the trial court’s decision that had denied Sutter Health’s pleading challenges.  Very few such writs are ever entertained.  Now, as the firm urged it to do, the Court of Appeal has ruled: “plaintiffs have failed to state a cause of action under the Confidentiality Act because they do not allege that the stolen medical information was actually viewed by an unauthorized person,”  and that “loss of possession” of the material alone does not show a “breach of confidentiality.” View attached pdf to read decision. Sutter Health issued a statement that “it is pleased that the judicial process has resulted in a ruling that will end litigation, which if it had continued would have diverted resources better spent on patient care, and would have increased the likelihood that private patient records would be used in litigation, even though no injury to patient confidentiality ever resulted from the theft.”   The firm is delighted to have been of assistance to Sutter Health in this matter.

Class Action Data Breach Writ Argument Held in Third District

June 23, 2014 – Rob Bunzel argued for client Sutter Health, in a large data breach case now in the Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento.  The appeal stems from 14 coordinated class actions brought against Sutter following the 2011  theft of a Sutter computer with a database related to 4.2 million patients.  Mr. Bunzel argued to the panel that no relief should be available to the class in the absence of plaintiff medical information being actually viewed by a third party, and that the inherently personal nature of medical privacy renders class actions improper.  In January 2013, the Court of Appeal had issued an extraordinary alternative writ, as requested by the firm for Sutter, which stayed all activity in the massive case so the Court of Appeal could first determine if a claim is stated under the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA).  Plaintiffs seek $1,000 per class member in CMIA statutory damages.  A merits decision on the writ should issue in the next 90 days, with a potential significant impact on other pending CMIA class actions. View PDF copy of the article.  Attorneys Mike Abraham, Bill Edlund, Simon Goodfellow and Zaneta Butscher and paralegal Dana Marie Knapp have assisted in this case.