Health care providers can’t charge ‘preparation fee’ for medical records not retrieved, MD top court rules

Listen to this article

Maryland’s Confidentiality of Medical Records Act does not allow a health care provider to charge a $22.88 “preparation fee” for a medical records search that does not result in any records being retrieved and prepared to be provided to the requesting party, the state’s highest court held Thursday.

In a unanimous ruling written by Chief Justice Matthew Fader, the Maryland Supreme Court revived a lawsuit filed in Baltimore County Circuit Court by Janice Hollabaugh against MRO Corporation which alleged the preparation fee charged by MRO (when MRO did not produce any records) violated a provision of the Confidentiality of Medical Records Act that authorized the fee for record “retrieval and preparation.”

The high court affirmed the circuit court’s finding that Hollabaugh had standing to bring her claim, but reversed the lower court’s ruling in determining the Confidentiality Act’s preparation fee for medical record retrieval and preparation allows a fee up to $22.88 to be charged “only when the health care provider actually retrieves and prepares records.”

“We see nothing in the statutory scheme to suggest that by authorizing a fee for ‘retrieval and preparation’ of medical records, the General Assembly intended to authorize providers to charge that fee for unsuccessful searches for such records,” Fader wrote. “Indeed, the opposite conclusion is more consistent with our ordinary principles of statutory interpretation.”

Hollabaugh filed the lawsuit in August 2022 as a class action suit, but the class was never certified due to the circuit court granting MRO’s motion to dismiss after concluding § 4-304(c) of the Health-General Article authorized MRO’s fee. The Maryland Appellate Court affirmed the lower court’s ruling.

Richard Gordon, co-counsel for Hollabaugh, praised the high court’s ruling, noting the preparation fee affects thousands of Marylanders.

“We believe it’s an important case for consumers in Maryland who need access to their medical records,” Gordon said in a phone call Friday. “It will stop consumers from being overcharged when they make requests for medical records.”

Lauren Geisser, also co-counsel for Hollabaugh, said the court’s opinion is well written and reflects the General Assembly’s intent and plain language of the law.

“It’s a major win for those who want access to their records,” Geisser said.

Counsel for MRO Corporation did not respond to requests for comment.

Maryland Association for Justice and Civil Justice, advocacy groups in Maryland seeking to preserve the civil justice system and increase legal services to low and moderate-income Marylanders, respectively, filed a joint amicus brief in the case in support of Hollabaugh.

“The right of access to [protected health information] is impaired when legislatures and courts allow gatekeepers, such as Respondent MRO Corporation, to charge excessive and illegal fees when patients exercise their rights,” counsel for the groups wrote, adding the lower courts’ rulings “undo the protections afforded to Marylanders by federal and state legislatures.”

Enacted last year, the Confidentiality of Medical Records Act aims to protect the privacy of patients and maintain the confidentiality of medical records by establishing rules for the maintenance and disclosure of those records, such as permitting health care providers to charge limited fees to certain individuals for copying and providing the information requested, according to the opinion.

The high court’s ruling sends Hollabaugh’s case back to the Baltimore County Circuit Court; counsel for Hollabaugh did not say what’s next in the case.