Krusac v. Covenant Med. Ctr., Inc. – April 2015 (Summary)

PEER REVIEW PRIVILEGE

Krusac v. Covenant Med. Ctr., Inc., Docket No. 149270 (Mich. Apr. 21, 2015)

Overturning a lower court decision, the Supreme Court of Michigan held that the state’s peer review statute protected the objective facts described in an incident report.

In this case, a patient’s estate brought suit against the hospital where the patient died following a cardiac catheterization during which she fell off the operating table. A nurse who was present at the catheterization – and during the patient’s fall – filed an incident report shortly after the event, which she submitted to her supervisor. During discovery, the patient’s estate became aware of the existence of the incident report and sought the facts contained therein, alleging that those facts were necessary for cross-examination because it would be unethical for the hospital to offer a defense inconsistent with the facts contained in the report. The trial court examined the incident report and then ordered the hospital to disclose the first page (the objective facts) to the estate.

The hospital appealed to the Supreme Court of Michigan, arguing that the incident report was protected by the state’s peer review statute and that the appellate court precedent which was being followed by the trial court incorrectly interpreted that state statute.        The Supreme Court of Michigan agreed with the hospital and clarified that the state’s peer review statute does not include an exception for objective facts that are recorded in an incident report. Instead, such facts are protected by the statute, along with all “records, data, and knowledge” collected for or by a peer review committee.