C.A. ex rel. Applegrad v. Bentolila (Summary)

PATIENT SAFETY ACT/PEER REVIEW/DISCOVERY

C.A. ex rel. Applegrad v. Bentolila, No. A-32-12 (071702) (N.J. Sept. 29, 2014)

The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed an earlier decision by the superior court, which had ordered a hospital to produce a memorandum it prepared as part of an investigation into the delivery of an infant. The court ruled that the memorandum was privileged under the New Jersey Patient Safety Act (“New Jersey PSA”).

In reviewing the legislative history of the New Jersey PSA, the court noted that the goal was to provide a basic framework for analysis and reporting of serious adverse events. The New Jersey PSA specifically creates a privilege for certain types of communications related to the evaluation and reporting of adverse events in the health care setting. In its analysis of the law, the court explained that the New Jersey PSA was intended “to encourage health care workers to candidly disclose their observations and concerns, and promote self-critical evaluation by professional and administrative staff.”

The document at issue was entitled “Director of Patient Safety Post-Incident Analysis” and had resulted from a round-table discussion following the infant’s delivery. The superior court had concluded that this document was not privileged because it did not meet all of the requirements stipulated by the New Jersey PSA regulations: no physicians were present for the round-table discussion and the findings recorded in the document were never presented to the Patient Safety Committee.

The court overruled this decision, noting that the New Jersey PSA regulations had not yet been adopted at the time the round-table discussion took place. The court reasoned that health care facilities were not required to anticipate the later regulatory standards, and concluded that the hospital had met the substantial requirements of the New Jersey PSA. It concluded that the document was privileged, was not subject to discovery and should not be used for any purpose in the case, including as a resource for the trial judge.