The Washington Supreme Court ruled on October 8, 2026, that Seattle Children’s Hospital did not violate the Washington Privacy Act (WPA) when it used technology to track user activity on its public website. The decision affects patients who alleged that their online searches and clicks were monitored without consent, raising concerns about privacy in digital health care.
The case, Baker v. Seattle Children’s Hospital, No. 104590-5, involved three plaintiffs—Carly Baker, Janssen Ramos Savoie, and Amber Shavies—who claimed that the hospital's use of Meta Platforms' tracking technology violated their privacy rights. The court's ruling clarifies the definition of 'private communication' under the WPA, which has implications for how hospitals and other organizations collect and use data from website visitors.
The plaintiffs argued that their interactions with the hospital's website constituted private communications that were intercepted and recorded without their consent. They claimed that the hospital shared their search data with Meta, which then used it for targeted advertising. However, the court found that the WPA only protects communications between two or more individuals and does not cover automated interactions with a corporate entity like the hospital.
The dispute began in 2013 when the plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit against Seattle Children’s Hospital, alleging violations of the WPA and other laws. They claimed that their searches for medical information and clinic hours on the hospital's public website were recorded by a tracking tool called Meta Pixel. This technology collects data on user activity and sends it to Meta without the users' knowledge.
The hospital argued that the plaintiffs' claims were not valid because the communications were not between individuals but rather between the users and an automated system. The trial court agreed and dismissed the case, leading the plaintiffs to appeal the decision. The Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal, stating that the searches and queries did not qualify as private communications under the WPA.
The Washington Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision authored by Justice Angelis, affirmed the lower court's ruling. The court emphasized that the WPA specifically refers to communications 'between two or more individuals,' which excludes automated interactions with a corporate entity. The court stated, 'The communications at issue occurred between a single member of the putative class and an automated website maintained by a corporation—SCH.' Therefore, the plaintiffs did not have a claim under the WPA.
The ruling highlights the importance of understanding the scope of privacy protections in the digital age, particularly as more health care services move online. The court's interpretation of the WPA could set a precedent for future cases involving data collection practices by hospitals and other organizations.
The decision may have broader implications for how hospitals and health care providers manage patient data. With increasing scrutiny on privacy practices, organizations may need to reassess their data collection methods and ensure transparency with patients about how their information is used.
Moving forward, the ruling could influence similar cases in Washington and potentially set a standard for how privacy laws are interpreted in the context of digital communications. As technology continues to evolve, the legal landscape surrounding privacy and data protection will likely remain a critical area of focus for courts and lawmakers.
The plaintiffs in this case did not abandon their claims related to other Washington laws, including the Washington Consumer Protection Act and the Washington Uniform Health Care Information Act. However, the court's opinion focused solely on the WPA claim, leaving the status of those other claims unclear.
As of now, it is uncertain whether the plaintiffs will seek to appeal the decision or pursue their remaining claims in lower courts. The outcome of this case underscores the ongoing challenges individuals face in protecting their privacy rights in an increasingly digital world.