DEFAMATION

Miller v. Tope,
No. Civ.A. 02-11151-DPW (D. Mass. Nov. 24, 2003)

The federal district court for the District of Massachusetts granted summary judgment for a physician's former residency department chairman who the physician alleged made defamatory statements about her on an evaluation and post-graduate training verification form submitted to the state Board when she applied for a medical license.

The court determined there was nothing in the evaluation form that could be construed as anything other than the department chair's opinion, based on his general impressions. There were, however, factual assertions contained in an attached letter that were not protected opinion. Nevertheless, the court found that the physician failed to produce sufficient evidence to show that the department chair acted with actual malice or in reckless disregard of the truth. Accordingly, the waiver in the authorization form signed by the physician barred all claims arising out of the department chair's alleged defamatory comments, and summary judgment was proper for the department chair.

The court reached a different conclusion with regard to the physician's former program director. Addressing a similar defamation claim against the physician's former residency program director, the court held that the answers on the evaluation form submitted by the program director contained factual assertions which could not be construed as protected opinions, and that the physician produced sufficient evidence with respect to the program director to create a triable issue for the jury as to whether the former program director acted with malice in his statements made to the Board.