BRADFORD DISNEY LUND ASKS THE CALIFORNIA APPEALS COURT TO FOLLOW THE FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS AND PROTECT HIS RIGHTS TO PRIVACY REGARDING HIS MEDICAL AND PERSONAL FINANCIAL RECORDS

LOS ANGELES, Jan. 13, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Oral Arguments will be heard this afternoon by the California Court of Appeals in Bradford Lund's appeal from Judge David Cowan's refusal to seal his confidential medical and financial records from the public record. Lund will argue that the probate court order violates the federal HIPAA mandate, the even more protective California legislation, "Confidentiality For Medical Information Act," and common law precedent, which protects an individual's right to keep such documents private. 

Lund's lawyers said in his appellate briefs:

"The Trustees' [filing] illustrates their systematic vindictiveness and hostility against [Mr. Lund] which is the antithesis of what it means to be a fiduciary.  It is appalling, but by now not shocking to Appellant, that his own fiduciaries would advocate for a position that is against his right to privacy designed to result in Appellant's embarrassment and an evisceration of his constitutional rights."

The definition of a fiduciary is: "A fiduciary relation in law…[is] founded upon the [loyalty] trust or confidence reposed by one person in the integrity and fidelity of another."

"How is it in my best interest for my own trustees to be hostile and advocate against my right to keep my confidential information private when they should really be protecting me?" asked Bradford Lund. "The Trustees have spent tens of millions of dollars of my trust money to hostilely attack me and violate my rights," says Lund.

According to the California appellate court filing, Mr. Lund says he has been in litigation with the Trustees for many years, over multiple breaches of fiduciary violations, including the right to his inheritance:

"[Brad Lund], the grandson of Walt Disney, and a competent 51-year-old adult, has been fighting relentlessly for over a decade against his Trustees for the right to the inheritance of his family of hundreds of millions of dollars. The trustees have filed thousands of pages of documents going back decades in an effort to paint [Mr. Lund] in a false light and prejudice the court. [Mr. Lund's] most intimate, personal, and private information is now threatened to be public record unless this Court steps in to protect his federal and state constitutional right to privacy."

Mr. Lund makes the argument that there is no necessity for the public to have access to these records since sealing the records still leaves them available for the court and opposing counsel to review and cite.

Mr. Lund's filings therefore conclude that the Trustees' desire to open these records to the public is proof of their "hostility" towards him:

"Without question, [Mr. Lund] has a privacy interest in the Exhibits he sought to have sealed. All of these Exhibits contain [Mr. Lund's] personal information regarding his medical status, his medical records, his financial information, and his private life. The Trustees' desire to have their own beneficiary's personal private information made available to the public clearly establishes their hostility toward [Mr. Lund]."

At the end of the day, Mr. Lund is still the Trustees' beneficiary to whom they owe a fiduciary duty," said Lanny J. Davis, an attorney advisor for Mr. Lund. "All we are asking is that these records remain private to the general public. Why are the Trustees fighting so hard against that simple request from their beneficiary?"  

Contact: Alex Lange
[email protected]
(202) 480-4309

SOURCE Lanny Davis