3 March 2014
Answer: Yes, in Massachusetts release to one person is enough. But keep in mind the release still must be deemed: 1) serious or substantial; and 2) unreasonable. Mass. Gen. Laws. c. 214 Section 1B.
The Supreme Judicial Court of
Massachusetts was asked the certified question from a federal court the following:
Can disclosure of private facts
about an employee among other employees of a corporation constitute sufficient
publication to infringe the employee’s right of privacy?
In addressing the question, the SJC stated that it had
indicated that intracorporate release of information would be a violation in
the past and answered “Yes.” Bratt v.
Int’l Bus. Machs. Corp., 392 Mass. 508, 519. In doing to, the SJC deviated
from the Restatement (Second) of Torts §
652D (1977), which required the disclosure of private facts to the public at
large. Id. It rejected the
defendant’s argument that since the disclosure was to only a few other
employees, there was not a violation.
Some years later, in a
non-employment context, the SJC reiterated the law in Massachusetts
in ruling that a release to only one person is enough in Tower v. Hirschhorn. 397 Mass. 581, 587-88 (1986). It found
that release of confidential information to one (or two) adversarial witnesses
in litigation could be deemed a release and cited its prior decision of Bratt. Id.
So, if you find yourself a victim
of the release of personal/confidential information about you, do not be
dissuaded by those that think since the release was only to a few people that you
have no claim. In Massachusetts, one it
enough!
In the event that you believe your
privacy may have been violated in Massachusetts, please feel free to contact this
office.
No comments:
Post a Comment