A general, thoracic, and vascular surgeon sued a hospital after his provisional appointment and clinical privileges were summarily suspended. The physician's claims were thrown out at the summary judgment stage because he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies (i.e., the hearing process set forth in the medical staff bylaws). In response, the physician brought another suit based on the same facts, which was dismissed for the same reasons. The physician appealed.

The California Court of Appeal upheld the lower court's grant of summary judgment, finding that a physician may not bring suit against a hospital if the physician has not exhausted the administrative remedies available to him or her. The court also described the physician as a "vexatious litigant" and ordered that the physician be prohibited from bringing suit in any California court without first obtaining the permission of the presiding judge. The court's order was based on the fact that the physician had, since the 1980s, brought 16 unsuccessful lawsuits based on frivolous claims and previously litigated issues. The court also noted that it was the physician's tendency to bring frivolous claims against any institution that limited his ability to practice, and then to sue his attorneys when those frivolous claims failed to exact a judgment in his favor.