Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Carroll v. Alberts
474 U.S. 1013
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 1985-12-02
- Topic
- finance
How later courts describe this case
- First Amendment free exercise clause does not bar imposition of tort liability for religiously motivated activity which amounts to a breach of physician-patient confidentiality
- “society is entitled to every person’s evidence in order that the truth may be discovered”
- “the First Amendment prohibits civil courts from intervening in disputes concerning religious doctrine, discipline, faith, or internal organization”
- “First Amendment prohibits civil courts from intervening in disputes concerning religious doctrine, discipline, faith, or internal organization”
- “It is clear that the assessment of an individual’s qualifications to be a minister, and the appointment and retirement of ministers, are ecclesiastical matters entitled to constitutional protection against judicial or other State interference”
- “all physicians owe their patients a duty, for violation of which the law provides a remedy, not to disclose without the patient’s consent medical information about the patient, except to meet a serious danger to the patient or others”
- "The courts that have imposed on physicians a duty of confidentiality and have recognized a cause of action to enforce that duty have grounded their decisions on the determination that public policy favors the protection of a patient's right to confidentiality"
- declaring physician's duty not to disclose patient's medical information
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Carroll v. Alberts. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 34 opinions
Sup. Jud. Ct. Mass. Motion of General Council on Finance and Administration of the United Methodist Church et al. for leave to file a brief as amici curiae granted. Certiorari denied.
Justice Brennan