Valfer v. Evanston Nw. Healthcare – April 2015 (Summary)

PEER REVIEW IMMUNITY

Valfer v. Evanston Nw. Healthcare, No. 1-14-2284 (Ill. App. Ct. Apr. 30, 2015)

The Appellate Court of Illinois affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a breach of contract claim brought by a physician against a hospital, holding that the hospital is immune from liability pursuant to the state peer review statute. The hospital found that 50% of the physician’s cases lacked demonstrable indication for surgical intervention, and did not reappoint him due to patient safety concerns. The physician brought suit alleging breach of contract and sought monetary damages. The hospital argued that it followed its bylaws and that it was immune under the state’s peer review statute. The court agreed and dismissed the case. The physician appealed, arguing that the hospital was not immune because its acts were willful and wanton, thus it was not protected by the statute.

The court held that the physician failed to plead or prove some type of physical harm, as is required by the statute to prove willful and wanton conduct. The court explained the peer review statute shields a hospital from civil liability unless it acted willfully and wantonly. The statute explicitly defines willful and wanton as a deliberate action that shows a disregard for a person’s safety. Here, the physician failed to plead that his, or any patients’, safety was threatened, thus he failed to show that the hospital’s conduct satisfied the statutory definition of willful and wanton.