Steinberg v. Good Samaritan Hosp. (Summary)

HCQIA/NPDB

Steinberg v. Good Samaritan Hosp., No. 4:10CV3085 (D. Neb. Oct. 22, 2013)

The United States District Court for Nebraska denied a hospital’s motion for summary judgment.  A psychiatrist brought suit against the hospital for defamation, after the hospital filed a report with the National Practitioner Data Bank (“NPDB”) about the psychiatrist.  It was later determined by HHS that the report was unnecessary.  The psychiatrist claimed that the NPDB report was filed in retaliation for his criticism of hospital administration.

The district court held that the hospital’s report to the NPDB was a statement of fact – not opinion – and thus was not protected by the First Amendment.  The court stated that the hospital referenced a “finding” in its report, which would indicate that there was a finding of fact determination by the hospital that the psychiatrist failed to meet the applicable professional standard.  The hospital argued that this was a true statement that shielded it from the psychiatrist’s defamation claims.  However, the court stated that it could not make a determination at the summary judgment phase as to whether or not this statement was true.