Gmail left open at work accessed by former colleagues

Listen to this article

Action: Verdict

Date: Dec. 16, 2023

Date of incident: May 30, 2017

Nature of claim: Violation of Stored Communications Act (18 U.S.C.A. Section 2701 et seq.)

Injuries alleged: Invasion of privacy

Amount: 0

Special or other damages: Attorney fees

Case name: Amanda Carson v. Emergency MD, LLC et al

Case no: 6:20-CV-01946-JD

Court: U.S. District Court, Greenville

Tried before: Jury

Judge: Joseph Dawson III

Attorneys: Wes Few, of Wesley D. Few LLC, Greenville (for the plaintiff); Mills Arial and Justin Mihalic, Greenville (for the defendant)

Defendants accessed plaintiff’s private Gmail account on at least one occasion, May 30, 2017. Plaintiff’s counsel discovered this when he received 106 pages representing 26 emails accessed and printed from the account and produced by defendant in a state court action, 2018-CP-23-01439.

Plaintiff had requested access to Emergency MD facilities to wrap up her work after her termination May 1, 2017. That request was denied, and her Gmail account was apparently left open on a shared work computer that anyone at the Emergency MD facility in Boiling Springs could access.

Defendants gave conflicting testimony about when, where and who accessed the account but acknowledged the 106 pages were hand-delivered to Dr. David Brancati at the Emergency MD location at Greenville the next day. Plaintiff presented evidence defendants were in the midst of preparing their “[Carson] Timeline” of events, as shown by defendants’ emails dated May 29, 2017.

Plaintiff’s counsel alleged the company and its counsel immediately knew the significance of the invasion of privacy by May or June 2017.

Defendants said the account access was accidental and inadvertent. Defendant Emergency MD alleged it was not liable because the individual who admitted access was not its employee then but rather was an employee of EMD Staffing LLC, which provided staffing services only to Emergency MD.

Only actual damages were submitted to the jury on two claims — common law Invasion of privacy and the Stored Communications Act.