Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SentToStud
It is interesting. The issues will be P Val's status as an "independent contractor" and not an "employee" and how HIPAA guidelines and requirements, especially those with respect to "Private
Health Information" (PHI) apply to his relationship with the State of California and the various racetracks by which he is compensated.
The Courts have generally held that HIPAA and it's PHI regs DO apply to the independent contractor class (earnings reported as 1099's), but not as stringently as to the employee class (W-2 folks). So that is an issue and while it could go through the State court system, it's likely to be resolved in federal court. So, that's one issue.
The second issue is whether whatever P Val agred to "give up" in terms of his right to privacy in return for his reinstatement(s) is reasonable and valid. While it's generally reasonable to allow people to make agreements when "consideration" is given by both parties, Federal Courts are likely to question whether the bargaining away of HIPAA PHI privacy rights is in the public interest. This is the other issue.
It's interesting.
|
You have got to be wrong. You are actually applying some common sense to a legal issue. How unusual.