DEFAMATION

Eye Medical & Surgical Association, et al. v. Advantage Health Partners, et al., No. 84585 (Ohio App. 8 Dist. January 6, 2005)

Advantage Health suspected that an Ohio physician that was working for it had engaged in billing irregularities and sought a review of his billing and treatment from an independent physician who was located in Georgia. The reviewing physician conducted the review and informed Advantage that she believed that the Ohio physician had engaged in billing irregularities. As a result of this report, the reviewing physician was contacted by the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio to conduct a further review. Once the second review was completed, the Ohio physician was indicted for billing fraud. The reviewing physician testified for the government at trial and the Ohio physician was acquitted.

The Ohio physician then brought a defamation action against the reviewing physician in state court in Ohio based upon statements that she made during the review of his practice. The reviewing physician filed a motion to dismiss the action based on the state court having no jurisdiction over her. The trial court agreed, dismissing the action against the reviewing physician, and the Ohio physician appealed.

The appeals court found that when the reviewing physician was conducting the review for Advantage, she had no contacts at all with Ohio, since she contracted with another entity through its Boston office, and sent all of her correspondence to Boston. The court found the fact that Advantage contracted with the other entity did not establish the necessary contacts between the reviewing physician and Ohio for jurisdiction over her. The appeals court also found that even though the reviewing physician did work with the U.S. Attorney in Ohio, she had governmental immunity. Thus, the appeals court found that the trial court had correctly dismissed the defamation claims.