Frengell v. InterCare Community Health Network demonstrates the counterintuitive nature of certain peer review actions.
Dr. Frengell’s employment was terminated following the inappropriate prescription of narcotics. InterCare reported Dr. Frengell to the National Practitioners’ Data Bank, although the report was not required and the court concluded, and InterCare admitted, that it had not provided any…
In Genchi v. Lower Florida Keys Hospital District, a Florida State Appeals Court took the opposite view from the Arkansas Supreme Court in Baptist Health, posted just last week, regarding the importance of preserving physician/patient relationships.
In Baptist Health, the Arkansas Supreme Court recognized the potential interference with physician patient relationships posed by…
The case of Wood v. Archbold Medical Center Inc., presents an interesting twist regarding HCQIA immunity. The holding basically provides that “professional review activity” is a lesser level of adverse activity and need not meet the due process standards of HCQIA in order for a hospital to retain HCQIA.
In Dr. Wood’s situation, there were…
Two recent decisions emphasize the ongoing battle for discovery of peer review information in negligence cases, and confirm that confidentiality is alive and well, but no longer automatic.
In Shell v. Sudan, the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska ordered that deposition questions regarding a hospital risk analysis tool were not…
Cases with opposing interpretations on this issue were decided within the past month. Heretofore, the basic question had been whether medical staff bylaws constituted contracts under state law. The majority of courts deciding these cases have concluded that medical staff bylaws were valid contracts. In the states with the opposite holdings, the basic theory was that bylaws merely…
Dr. Gary Ritten was a medical staff member at Lapeer Regional Medical Center in Indiana. He was summarily suspended in September 2005, allegedly in retaliation for refusing to transfer a patient who had not been stabilized as required by EMTALA. The suspension was initially rescinded by the Medical Executive Committee, although it was reinstated by the hospital’s…
In Bansal vs. Mount Carmel Health Systems, Inc., an Ohio state appellate court ruled that the hospital had failed to prove that documents were protected by Ohio’s statutory peer review privilege (Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.25), and reversed a trial court summary judgment decision. Dr. Girraj K. Bansal was removed from the hospital’s call schedule, and…
In Kentucky, common law president permits discovery of peer review documents. Ohio Rev. Code § 2305.252 protects peer review discovery.
In Saleba v. Schrand, the estate of a Kentucky resident sued an Ohio physician and Good Samaritan Hospital, located in Cincinnati, Ohio, in Kentucky based upon the results of medical services performed in Ohio. The Kentucky…
The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled in Board of Registration in Medicine v. Hallmark Health Corp. that the Massachusetts licensing board would subpoena certain hospitals peer review records.
In Director of Health Affairs Policy Planning, University of Connecticut v. Freedom of Information Commission, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that the state’s freedom of information…
In Hospital Authority of Valdosta and Lowndes County v. Meeks, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that information contained in a physician’s peer review file was not necessarily protected by the Georgia Peer Review Confidentiality Statute.
Although the holding is enticing from the physician perspective, the limitations contained in the opinion render the precedent potentially meaningless.…
