Majority
The Supreme Court also properly determined that the appellants-respondents had violated Public Health Law § 18 (6) when they released medical records to the New York State Retirement System without authorization. Public Health Law § 18 (6) provides that patient information disclosed by a health care provider to a third party must be kept confidential by the party receiving such information.
Since the facts are undisputed and the appellants-respondents possess no additional defenses beyond those which they have already provided to the court, "[n]o purpose would be served by remitting the matter to the Supreme Court for service of an answer” (Briedis v Village of Tuxedo Park, 156 AD2d 744 , 746).
The appellants-respondents’ remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Warth v. Seldin 422 US 490 at 514 p. 535
- Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission 432 US 333 at 343 p. 535
- Briedis v. Village of Tuxedo Park 156 AD2d 744 at 746 p. 535