|
2913 During litigation, an attorney's disclosure of a litigant's HIV status, when it was irrelevant to the litigation, violated a privacy interest that outweighed the purpose of the litigation privilege and thus could be the basis of liability for invasion of the right to privacy under the state Constitution.CitationJEFFREY H v IMAI, TADLOCK... (HIV Disclosure) 85 CA4 345 [See: CA Const I,1; CivC 47; H&SC 120975 etseq; White v Davis 13 C3 757; Chico v Scully 208 CA3 230; Wilkinson v Times 215 CA3 1034; Hill v NCAA 7 C4 1; Cutter v Brownbridge 183 CA3 836; Urbaniak v Newton 226 CA3 1128; Silberg v Anderson 50 C3 205]
|
|
