SUMMARY SUSPENSION

Tolwin v. Cedars-Sinai Med. Ctr., No. B184632 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 13, 2007)

The California Court of Appeal held that a peer review committee's recommendation for disciplinary action could be independently altered by a hospital's Medical Executive Committee ("MEC") and governing Board as long as the MEC and the Board granted appropriate deference to the professional expertise of the medical staff.

A physician whose privileges had been summarily suspended challenged the decision of the hospital's Board not to rescind his suspension. He argued that the hospital had violated his common law right to fair procedure and failed to follow standards set forth in California's peer review statute. Specifically, he alleged that the MEC and the Board engaged in an improper independent review of the findings of the peer review committee, and should have limited their review to assuring the committee followed the procedures set forth in the hospital bylaws. The appeals court disagreed, ruling that the MEC and the Board had accepted the committee's findings to the extent that such findings involved medical expertise, which was all that was required of them. The appeals court reaffirmed its earlier case law by stating that the MEC and the Board "remain free to reject the inferences drawn from [the committee's] findings."