Home > Legal Library > Abstract




Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected


Judicial Invasion into the Peer Review Privilege



by A. Joseph Engel
Smith Haughey Rice & Roegge, P.C. - Grand Rapids Office

Stephanie C. Hoffer
Smith Haughey Rice & Roegge, P.C. - Grand Rapids Office

February 14, 2014

Previously published on February 12, 2014

Recently, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld a sanction of almost $54,000 imposed against a hospital and its defense attorney in a surgical Bovie burn case. In Harrison v Munson, the trial court imposed the sanction (which was the amount plaintiff incurred in prosecuting the action) after it reviewed an incident report in camera and decided the defense presented by the hospital was inconsistent with “facts” contained in the incident report. The ensuing maelstrom was caused by a single phrase used by a nurse drafting the incident report: “During procedure Bovie was laid on drape, in a fold.” Although the trial court determined the incident report was protected from disclosure by the peer review privilege, it still used its own interpretation of the incident report facts to assess the validity of the defense presented. The trial court concluded the defense violated certain ethical rules, and imposed the sanctions as punishment.


 

The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.
 

View More Library Documents By...

 
Author
 
A. Joseph Engel
Stephanie C. Hoffer
Smith Haughey Rice & Roegge, P.C.
 
Grand Rapids Office
Grand Rapids Office
Practice Area
 
Medical Malpractice
 
Smith Haughey Rice & Roegge, P.C. Overview