Goidel v. Aetna Life Insurance Company

Background

The plaintiffs filed a putative class action alleging that Aetna discriminated against LGBTQ members in covering fertility treatments, including intrauterine insemination and in vitro fertilization. They asserted a claim under Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act and proposed classes that included New Yorkers enrolled in plans provided or administered by Aetna who had been or were being denied fertility-treatment coverage because of sexual orientation or gender identity.

The parties submitted a joint letter about a discovery dispute. The plaintiffs sought unredacted names of Aetna plan members in New York who had submitted discrimination complaints concerning denial of fertility benefits because the members were in same-sex relationships. They also sought related complaints, appeals, and internal Aetna review documents with the complainants’ names unredacted.

Parties’ Positions

The plaintiffs argued that the individuals could provide evidence relevant to class certification and Aetna’s intent. They relied on decisions allowing disclosure of potential class members’ names when the information is relevant to class-certification issues or could help plaintiffs contact potential witnesses. They also argued that the existing protective order adequately protected the individuals’ privacy and qualified as a protective order permitting disclosure of personal health information for the litigation.

Aetna argued that courts generally disfavor disclosure of absent putative class members’ identities before class certification. It asserted that the requested documents contained highly sensitive reproductive-health information, that the redacted documents already provided information about the alleged discrimination, and that the plaintiffs had not shown why the names were necessary. Aetna also argued that disclosure had to comply with the federal health-information law and applicable state laws.

Court Action

The order did not decide whether Aetna had to disclose the names or documents. Instead, the court scheduled a discovery conference for Thursday, February 2, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. Counsel were directed to call Judge Figueredo’s conference line at the scheduled time. Judge Vernon S. Broderick is identified in the filing as the district judge, while the scheduling direction refers to Judge Figueredo; the text does not provide Judge Figueredo’s full name.