Lee Med., Inc. v. Beecher (Summary)
PEER REVIEW PRIVILEGE
Lee Med., Inc. v. Beecher, No. M2008-02496-SC-S90-CV (Tenn. May 24, 2010)
The Supreme Court of Tennessee partially vacated a trial court’s discovery orders and held that the Tennessee peer review privilege did not apply to an audit report considering whether a health system should stop outsourcing the provision of vascular access services, because the report did not involve a physician’s conduct, competence, or ability to practice medicine.
In the case, the health system’s hospitals, relying on the report, which was prepared by a third party, cancelled their contracts with a vascular access services provider to which it was outsourcing these services. The report demonstrated that it would be cheaper to provide vascular access services in-house. The provider filed suit, asserting numerous claims, including breach of contract, against several parties involved in preparing the report ("defendants"). The provider, as part of an "aggressive discovery campaign," filed a motion to compel production of the report. The defendants argued that the report was protected by the state peer review privilege. The lower court concluded that the audit report was protected by the privilege. The Supreme Court of Tennessee disagreed. Although it found that the committees that reviewed the report and made the decision to provide vascular services in-house were peer review committees under the broad definition of peer review committee within the statute, the court concluded that the proceedings in which the committees reviewed the report were not peer review proceedings because they were not related to a physician’s professional conduct or competence.