O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 24-12-20 (2019)

Confidential nature of AIDS information

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

AIDS confidential information as defined in Code Section 31-22-9.1 and disclosed or discovered within the patient-physician relationship shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed except as otherwise provided in Code Section 24-12-21.

History

Code 1981, § 24-12-20, enacted by Ga. L. 2011, p. 99, § 2/HB 24.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Editor’s notes. - In light of the similarity of the statutory provisions, decisions under former O.C.G.A. § 24-9-40.1 are included in the annotations for this Code section. Use of pseudonyms. - When a patient filed suit solely alleging that the improper disclosure of HIV confidential information and the non-disclosure excep-

tion of former O.C.G.A. § 24-9-47(y) (see now O.C.G.A. § 24-12-21) did not apply, a trial court retained discretion to determine if the patient could prosecute a case under a pseudonym. Doe v. Hall, 260 Ga. App. 421, 579 S.E.2d 838, 2003 Ga. App. LEXIS 393 (2003) (decided under former O.C.G.A. § 24-9-40.1).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2020–2022 · leading case: Collett v. Olympus Optical Co Ltd, No. 3:18-cv-00066 (M.D. Ga. Oct. 16, 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Collett v. Olympus Optical Co Ltd, No. 3:18-cv-00066 (M.D. Ga. Oct. 16, 2020). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 24-12-20. “No person or legal entity which receives AIDS confidential information .”
Pride Med., Inc. v. John Doe, 879 S.E.2d 845 (Ga. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “The plaintiffs asserted claims for invasion of privacy, breach of confidential relationship and fiduciary duty, violation of OCGA § 24-12-20 (prohibiting disclosure of confidential HIV/AIDS information), negligence, gross negligence, wrongful disclosure of confidential…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.