Surgeon’s Discrimination Case Dismissed
The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida granted summary judgment to a hospital and medical group on a pediatric surgeon’s gender discrimination, retaliation, and fraud claims, finding that the physician’s employment termination followed a legitimate peer review process, was based on contractual requirements, and was not supported by evidence of discriminatory or retaliatory intent. Note: This is the case that the Eleventh Circuit determined, in earlier proceedings, that the peer review records of other surgeons were protected as Patient Safety Work Product under the Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act. Loux v. BayCare Med. Grp., Inc.
TJC Materials Not Protected by Self-Critical Analysis and Peer Review Privilege
The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey granted a motion to compel production of corrective actions documents submitted to The Joint Commission (“TJC”) in a case brought by a patient’s legal guardian asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and for medical negligence against administrators and employees of a psychiatric hospital. The court concluded that the New Jersey self-critical analysis and peer review privileges were inapplicable in cases brought in federal court and involving federal claims. Crumidy v. Wramage-Caporoso
HCQIA Immunity Protects Hospital in Termination of Privileges Suit
The Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, affirmed judgment in favor of a hospital and others dismissing claims brought by a physician following the termination of her clinical privileges. The court concluded, among other things, that statutory immunity barred the physician from recovering damages arising from the peer review proceedings. With respect to immunity under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act (“HCQIA”), the court determined that the requirements under the law were met. Of note, the court observed that the “eight-day evidentiary hearing that the [hospital] provided and the detailed factual findings that it expressed in its report, along with the prior work of the study and investigative committees, satisfy the HCQIA requirement that the action be taken after a reasonable effort to obtain the facts.” Levitin v. Nw. Cmty. Hosp.