DATA BANK REPORTS

Costa v. Leavitt, No. 4:05CV3248 (D. Neb. July 26, 2006)

The United States District Court for the District of Nebraska reviewed the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' ("DHHS") refusal to void a National Practitioner Data Bank ("NPDB") report and, in the end, overruled that decision, holding that DHHS acted arbitrarily and capriciously. In this case, a physician withdrew his application for reappointment and surrendered his privileges following a quality assurance meeting at which three of the physician's cases were discussed, as well as a meeting of the hospital's medical executive committee, which voted to deny the physician's application. The hospital filed a Data Bank report, stating that the physician resigned while under investigation for issues related to competence and professional conduct (in the form of poor interaction with nurses). The physician challenged the report, but DHHS upheld it, finding that the evidence supported that the physician was under investigation when he resigned. The physician sought review from the federal district courts, arguing that the hospital's quality assurance meeting was not an "investigation" and, therefore, the physician's surrender of privileges following that meeting was not reportable. The United States District Court for the District of Nebraska agreed with the physician and held that the quality assurance meeting was not an investigation. In addition, the court held that the hospital failed to substantiate that the medical staff voted to reject Dr. Costa's application for reappointment because of concerns about his competency and conduct, noting that the minutes of the executive committee meeting did not mention such concerns. In the absence of evidence showing that the executive committee's decision was based on conduct that may adversely affect patient care, the court held that the Data Bank report was inappropriate.