What started as a new relationship has landed squarely in court, with Colorado resident Julie Bendon accusing a University of Colorado School of Medicine obstetrician-gynecologist of snooping through her private medical chart after learning Bendon was dating the doctor’s ex-husband.
According to a lawsuit filed in Adams County District Court, Bendon says the alleged peeking at her gynecological records, followed by an accusation that she was stalking, cost her sleep, pushed her to seek medical care and left her scared that more intimate health details might spill out.
As reported by The Denver Post, Bendon filed the complaint on July 13, 2026, naming the University of Colorado School of Medicine and Dr. Karen Ashbeck as defendants. The complaint alleges Ashbeck accessed Bendon’s records twice in 2023, even though Bendon was never her patient, and later accused Bendon of stalking.
What the Complaint Says
The heart of the suit is a set of allegedly unauthorized, personal searches of Bendon’s gynecological chart after Ashbeck learned about Bendon’s relationship with her ex-husband. Bendon contends those searches were not for treatment or professional reasons but personal ones, and that the fallout led to confrontations and lingering anxiety.
The lawsuit seeks damages for emotional distress and related harms that Bendon ties directly to those alleged disclosures and the fear that her most private medical information could surface again.
University and Hospital Responses
In a statement to The Denver Post, UCHealth said it “constantly checks” who is accessing patient records to look for improper viewing. The health system also told the paper that Bendon did not receive care at any UCHealth facilities.
The University of Colorado confirmed to the outlet that Ashbeck no longer worked there and that, as laid out in the complaint, Ashbeck is alleged to have accessed Bendon’s records twice in 2023.
Legal Stakes and Privacy Rules
Behind the soap-opera setup sits a very dry but serious rulebook. The federal HIPAA Privacy Rule limits when medical staff can open a patient’s chart, generally allowing access only for treatment, payment, or health-care operations. Pulling up a file out of curiosity or for personal reasons can count as an impermissible disclosure.
According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which outlines enforcement protocols on HHS, improper snooping by members of a provider’s workforce is a common trigger for investigations and often leads to corrective actions.
What’s Next
The case will now work its way through Adams County District Court, where Bendon is seeking damages in state court. Her attorney has said he cannot discuss specifics while the litigation is pending.
If investigators or regulators ultimately determine that the access was improper, the dispute could result in internal discipline at the involved institutions and potential federal scrutiny under medical privacy rules.
