it is in johnson county, texas. it's a signed affidavit that has now become a TRO and public document
parts of it are accurate. i do have depression and hospital visits. however the treatment and diagnosis were prive, with very few people aware. the allegation of retaliation is ludicris. the disabilty discrimination is throughout the affidavi turned TRO.
my exboyfriends exwife filed it together with a petition to modify. i never received the order and certainly did get the chance to dispute it.
Thank you for your follow-up. Please allow me to respond directly to your posts. Some of my information will likely be unfavorable, so please do not blame the proverbial messenger.The reason I focused on accuracy is because under defamation rules, the ultimate defense to either libel or slander is truth. So if the information is true, it is not libelous and therefore a suit for libel would not prevail. Since the courts ended up accepting the information in the documentation, the information is presumed to be true which would negate a suit for such claims.In terms of HIPAA, the law generally protects the confidentiality of medical records and provides recourse against specific entities if they violate the law, but not others. Specifically, 3 major groups are covered--those are health care providers, health plans, and health care clearinghouses. It does not affect others. Furthermore HIPAA has an exception for medical records that are requested for court hearings and cases. Otherwise no medical records would ever be permitted to be heard in court. This is not a HIPAA violation if the documents were provided to the courts.Finally, 'disability discrimination' is generally based on being treated differently due to an impairment such employment or mobility. It is not related to those who have impairments and due to those impairments are unable to perform certain actions, or causes unfitness for family law concerns or other issues. This isn't disability discrimination--otherwise the courts would be unable to make any decisions against those with an impairment that would be based on that impairment, which would be against public policy.Good luck.
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).