Sanchez v. Bumann – April 2015 (Summary)

DEFAMATION/STATE PRIVILEGE

Sanchez v. Bumann, Civil Action No. 2012-0072 (D. V.I. Apr. 9, 2015)

The U.S. District Court of the Virgin Islands found that the Chief of Anesthesiology did not have a legal duty to make allegedly defamatory statements to authorities at the hospital and, thus, he did not qualify for an absolute privilege under state law.

An employed anesthesiologist reported to the hospital improper professional practices and inappropriate conduct on the part of the Chief of Anesthesiology. According to the complaint, the Chief of Anesthesiology then began retaliating against the anesthesiologist by falsely reporting that he had a drug problem, was diverting narcotics, and was incompetent. The anesthesiologist filed a lawsuit asserting a claim for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress against the Chief of Anesthesiology.

The Chief of Anesthesiology filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit claiming that his statements were absolutely privileged because he was legally obligated to report the anesthesiologist’s misconduct.

The court found that the Chief of Anesthesiology was not entitled to an absolute privilege because he was not legally compelled to make the statements that he did. The hospital bylaws, while applicable, were not codified laws or regulations, and thus did not create a legal duty on the part of the Chief of Anesthesiology. The court acknowledged that the Chief of Anesthesiology may be entitled to a conditional privilege, stemming from his employment, if his employment required him to make the statements. However, the court rejected the argument that an absolute privilege applies in this situation.