HCQIA

Cowett v. TCH Pediatrics Inc., No. 05 MA 138 (Ohio Ct. App. Sept. 27, 2006)

In accordance with its medical staff bylaws, a hospital revoked a physician’s medical staff privileges and reported the action to the National Practitioner Data Bank ('NPDB"). The physician filed a complaint against the hospital, but the trial court granted the hospital’s motion for summary judgment, finding it had immunity under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act ("HCQIA"). The physician argued that the hospital acted in bad faith when it initiated and conducted its peer review process, and, therefore, should not qualify for immunity under the HCQIA.

The Ohio Court of Appeals held that a hospital can be immune under HCQIA if it has a reasonable belief that a peer review action was taken in the furtherance of quality health care, even though it had ulterior motives for wanting to be rid of a particular physician, and that both state and federal courts nationwide have unanimously concluded that evidence of a hospital's bad faith is irrelevant and that the court should use an objective, rather than a subjective, test to determine whether a hospital's belief was reasonable. Since the physician could not overcome the presumption that the hospital’s actions were reasonable, the court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the hospital.