Junk v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting similar argument by State Farm, in part because section 901.10 of Title 50 does not specifically reference medical records
• rejecting similar challenge suggesting impossibility of dual compliance with West Virginia protective order and New York law enumerating insurance claim files retention requirements
• “This Court finds no language extending the provision of the HIPPA [sic] statutes [citation] and regulations [citation] to liability insurers ***.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).