Court Rules Hospitals Liable for Sharing Room Numbers
Minnesota's Supreme Court holds that a patient's room number is protected health information under state law.
Updated on Nov. 5, 2026 in Healthcare
The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that hospitals can be held liable if they share a patient's room number without consent, treating the number as part of a public health record. The decision arose from a 2022 case involving a Coon Rapids man admitted to Mercy Hospital after a tree-trimming accident.
Why it matters
The ruling sets a state-level precedent on patient privacy and could complicate how hospitals share information with families, caregivers and law enforcement. Allina Health System, the Minnesota Hospital Association and the state's largest public safety labor union opposed the decision.
The ex-wife phoned seven hospitals across the metro area before United Hospital gave her a room and bed number for the patient at Mercy Hospital. The case does not state any damages awarded or how the ruling will be applied in future disputes.
The players
Allina Health System
A large Minnesota healthcare provider that opposed the Supreme Court's ruling on patient room numbers.
Minnesota Hospital Association
The statewide trade group representing Minnesota hospitals, which opposed the ruling.
The details
A Coon Rapids man was admitted to Mercy Hospital's emergency room after a tree-trimming accident. His ex-wife provided his name and date of birth, asked whether he was a patient, and was given a room and bed number by United Hospital, which the court found could be actionable.
Timeline
2022: The case originated after the Coon Rapids man's hospital admission.
Week of November 5, 2026: The Minnesota Supreme Court issued its room number privacy ruling.
Roadmap
The decision applies the Minnesota Health Records Act to a question of room-number disclosure, extending state privacy protections to information hospitals have previously treated as routine. It places Minnesota among jurisdictions weighing how far health-record confidentiality reaches beyond clinical data.
Minnesotans admitted to hospitals may find staff more cautious about confirming whether a person is a patient or where they are located. Families seeking to locate a loved one may face more limited information at the front desk.
The takeaway
Patients and families should understand that hospitals may now withhold even basic location details, so it helps to designate a contact in advance and carry written consent forms where possible.
Further reading
For more on how healthcare policy intersects with patient privacy, see Healthcare coverage across the state.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Star Tribune.
