The Health Law Ticker

The California Supreme Court recently issued its decision in Boermeester v. Carry. Though the case deals with fair procedure within a private university’s internal disciplinary proceedings, it provides helpful guidance for peer review bodies navigating medical disciplinary hearings.

Boermeester reiterated the long-standing admonition that courts should not try to impose “rigid procedures” upon private organizations’ administrative proceedings. Rather, the organizations themselves should develop methods for providing the fundamentals of fair ...

On May 18, 2023 the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released a Notice for Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) for updates to the Health Breach Notification Rule, 16 C.F.R. Part 318 (the Rule). The Rule serves to ensure entities that are not defined as Covered Entities under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) are nevertheless accountable when the sensitive health information of consumers is compromised and that entities cannot conceal breaches from consumers. The Rule imposes notification requirements for a breach of unsecured identifiable health ...

Parties in peer review hearings can present a wide range of relevant evidence, regardless of its admissibility in a court of law.  But California has passed a new “apology law” that modifies that standard, erecting a potential hurdle for medical staffs to admit relevant evidence against practitioners in peer review hearings.

Under California law, statements, writings, or benevolent gestures expressing sympathy or a general sense of benevolence relating to the pain, suffering, or death of a person involved in an accident are inadmissible in civil trials.  (Evid. Code, § 1160.)  ...

It’s no secret that patients from marginalized groups experience lower quality health care.  Acknowledging its role in closing the health care disparity gap, the Joint Commission recently announced new and revised requirements to reduce health care disparities in accredited facilities.  For medical staffs, the new accreditation standard provides an opportunity to lead the fight against health care disparities.

Medical literature over the past twenty years confirms the persistence of health care disparities.  In August 2021, the Journal of the American Medical Association ...

While hospital medical staffs have traditionally handled most of California’s peer review activity, recent trends are forcing more and more medical groups to wrestle with reporting and fair hearing obligations when disciplining physicians—or else face costly litigation from doctors and six-figure fines from the Medical Board of California.

Broadly speaking, peer review is how healthcare entities—including medical groups—determine whether a physician is qualified to practice in a particular healthcare setting and perform ongoing assessments of that ...

Many medical staffs are wondering whether they may conduct remote peer review committee meetings in the interest of supporting social distancing efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic. While it is certainly reasonable to do so, the medical staff must ensure that they have appropriate safeguards in place prior to conducting such meetings. Below we have provided the answer to some questions that may arise when deciding whether to conduct peer review meetings remotely.

Do the governing documents already allow for meetings to be conducted by telephone or video?

Medical staffs should ...

In a decision affecting California hospitals, medical groups, medical staffs, and physicians, the California First District Court of Appeal has concluded that a physician’s notice and hearing rights apply to situations where a hospital directs a medical group of a closed department to remove a physician from the hospital schedule.

In Economy v. Sutter East Bay Hospitals, Sutter Hospital operated a closed anesthesia department pursuant to a contract with East Bay Anesthesiology Medical Group (East Bay Group).  The exclusive contract required all physicians providing ...