Crafton v. River West Med. Ctr. (Full Text)

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF LOUISIANA

FIRST CIRCUIT

2008 CA 0348

LAURA CRAFTON M D

VERSUS

RIVER WEST MEDICAL CENTER RICK DlCAPO RIVER WEST
MEDICAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE CYRIAC LUKE M D AND
STEVEN LEE M D

CONSOLIDATED WITH

2008 CA 0349

RIVER WEST L P d b a RIVER WEST MEDICAL CENTER

VERSUS

LAURA CRAFTON M D

Judgment rendered

OCT 3 1

ZOOR

On Appeal from the 18th Judicial District Court
Parish of Iberville State of Louisiana
Numbers 57 570 and 57 619
The Honorable Alvin Batiste Jr Judge Presiding

Glen Scott Love
Robert L Graves
Baton Rouge LA
and
Ralph M Bard M D J D
Pro Hac Vice
Tullahoma TN

F Barry Marionneaux
F Charles Marionneaux
Plaquemine LA

Monica A Frois
Nathalie G Simon
Brandy N Sheely
New Orleans LA

Counsel for Plaintiff Appellant
Laura Crafton M D

Counsel for Defendants Appellees
River West L P d b a River West
Medical Center Rick DiCapo
River West Medical Executive
Committee Cyriac Luke M D and
Steven Lee M D

Cyriac Luke M D
James Grace M D James Smith
M D Connie Keller Andrew
Hargroder M D Paul Jackson
M D Gerald Falgoust M D and
Steven Lee M D

BEFORE CARTER C J WHIPPLE AND DOWNING JJ

DOWNING J

Laura Crafton M D appeals a summary judgment granted in favor of the

appellees

collectively River West

based on immunity pursuant to the Health

Care Quality Improvement Act and the Louisiana Peer Review Statute

The

judgment dismissed Dr Crafton s claims against River West arising from her

termination from employment and dismissed River West from the lawsuit We

affirm the judgment

PERTINENT FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Dr Crafton had privileges to practice medicine at the River West medical

facility when she was summarily suspended in August 2001 A Medical Executive

Committee met within three days and ratified the summary suspension Dr

Crafton timely requested a hearing to review the actions against her After a peer

review hearing the hearing committee ratified Dr Crafton s suspension

Dr Crafton subsequently filed suit against River West asserting several

causes of action River West filed a reconventional demand and a separate action

These actions were consolidated After discovery was completed River West filed

the motion for summary judgment

that

is at issue on appeal

The trial court

granted River West s motion for summary judgment dismissing Dr Crafton s

claims against them

Dr Crafton appealed asserting one assignment of error

the trial court erred

in granting River West s summary judgment motion and dismissing her claims

DISCUSSION

Summary judgment on the issue of conditional privilege under the Health

Care Quality Improvement Ace HCQIA

and the Louisiana Peer Review

Statute3 is appropriate Smith v Our Lady of the Lake Hosp Inc 93 2512 pp

1 rile appellees include River West LP d b a River West Medical Center Rick DiCapo Carl W Scherer 111 M
D
Antonio Edwards M D Cyriac Luke MD lames Grace M D James Smith M D Connie Keller Andrew
DGreg Ward M D and Steve Lee M D
M D Gerard Falgoust M
Hargrodcr M D
Paul
lackson

42 U S c 11101 elseq

Louisana Revised Statutes

3 37

53C

contains the conditional privilege for tbe Louisiana peer review process
2

19 20 La 7 5 94

639 So 2d 730 746 Further

there is a reable presumption

that the professional review action satisfies the requirements of 42 US C 9

11112 a

Manasra v St Francis Medical Center Inc 33 312 p 11 La App

2 Cir 6 23 00

764 So 2d 295 302 03 Therefore

the plaintiff physician bears

the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the peer review

process did not satisfy the statutory requirements

Because of the

presumption of fairness set forth in HCQIA the burden is on Dr Crafton to

establish that the requirements of HCQIA were not satisfied

Id 33 312 at p 12

764

So2d at 303 Additionally the Louisiana Supreme Court construes La R S

13 3715 3C to include a presumption of good faith Smith 93 2512 at p 20 639

So 2d at 747

Hence the burden is on the plaintiff physician to establish a lack of

good faith or malice

We review summary judgment on appeal de novo

using the same criteria

that govern the trial court s determination of whether summary judgment

appropriate i e whether there is any genuine issue of material fact and whether

the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law Samaha v Ran 07 1726

pp 3 4 La 226 08

977 So 2d 880 882 83

Here River West supported its motion for summary judgment based on

immunity with full transcripts of the hearings affidavits and exhibits showing its

procedures and proceedings

It provided a List of Undisputed Material Facts

made in accordance with Louisiana District Court Rules Rule 9 10 properly

referencing the exhibits in support of its motion for summary judgment

Dr Crafton s evidence disputes many of the asserted facts but she opposes

the recognition of immunity for River West on four basic grounds which she

asserts rebut the presumptions in its favor She argues that her due process rights

were violated by having the hearing officer chairman in a fair hearing also

represent the Medical Executive Committee she argues that inconsistent testimony

of the River West chief executive officer creates credibility issues that are

improper for resolution on summary judgment

she argues that her due process

rights were violated when the hearing officer chairman took advice from the

Medical Executive Committee s attorney and she argues that River West failed to

substantially comply with its own bylaws

In these regards she argues that she

was limited in the presentation of evidence at the hearing that River West applied

its bylaws in bad faith that she was given insufficient notice and that she was

given voluminous evidence without adequate time to review She further argues

that expert evidence is necessary to identify whether or not bad faith peer review

has occurred

On our de novo review we agree with the trial court in its findings that Dr

Crafton has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she can

establish bad faith or that the peer review process did not satisfy the statutory

requirements

The trial court s thorough and perspicacious oral reasons clearly

explain why summary judgment

is appropriate in this matter Since the trial

court s reasons adequately explain the decision we adopt the trial court s reasons

and will affirm the summary judgment granted in favor of River West dismissing

Dr Crafton s claims against the specifically named parties

DECREE

We affirm the summary judgment granted in favor of River West LP db a

River West Medical Center Rick DiCapo Carl W Scherer III MD Antonio

Edwards M D Cyriac Luke MD James Grace M D James Smith M D

Connie Keller Andrew Hargroder M D Paul Jackson M D Gerard Falgoust

M D Greg Ward M D and Steven Lee M D dismissing Dr Crafton s claims

against them Costs of this appeal are assessed against Dr Laura Crafton We

issue this memorandum opinion in compliance with Uniform Rules

Courts of

Appeal Rule 2 16 I B

AFFIRMED