Dittman v. UPMC

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Dittman v. UPMC

170 A.3d 1042

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided September 12, 2017·No. No. 149 WAL 2017·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM

.AND NOW, this 12th day of September, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by Petitioners are:

a. Does an employer have a legal duty to use reasonable care to safeguard sensitive personal information of its employees when the employer chooses to [1043]*1043store such information on an internet accessible computer system? ■

b. Does the economic loss doctrine permit recovery for purely pecuniary damages which result from the breach of an independent legal duty arising under common law, as opposed to the breach of a contractual duty?

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

PER CURIAM

.AND NOW, this 12th day of September, 2017, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by Petitioners are:

a. Does an employer have a legal duty to use reasonable care to safeguard sensitive personal information of its employees when the employer chooses to [1043]*1043store such information on an internet accessible computer system? ■

b. Does the economic loss doctrine permit recovery for purely pecuniary damages which result from the breach of an independent legal duty arising under common law, as opposed to the breach of a contractual duty?

Dittman v. UPMC, 170 A.3d 1042 (Pa. 2017).

Pincite

170 A.3d 1042 (Dittman v. UPMC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related