§5-29-20  Privileges and immunities for peer review activities. –


Published: 2015

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Get a Day Pass for only USD$49.99.
TITLE 5

Businesses and Professions

CHAPTER 5-29

Podiatrists

SECTION 5-29-20



   § 5-29-20  Privileges and immunities for

peer review activities. –

(a) Neither the proceedings nor the records of peer review boards are subject

to discovery or admissible in evidence in any case except litigation arising

out of the imposition of sanctions upon a podiatrist. Any imposition or notice

of a restriction of privileges or a requirement of supervision imposed on a

podiatrist for unprofessional conduct is subject to discovery and admissible in

any proceeding against the podiatrist or against any podiatry care facility or

podiatry care provider which allows the podiatrist to perform the podiatry

procedures which are the subject of the restrictions or supervision during the

period of any imposition or notice of a restriction of privileges or a

requirement of supervision, and apply to records made in the regular course of

business by a hospital or other provider of health care information. Documents

or records available from original sources are not to be construed as immune

from discovery or use in any civil proceedings merely because they were

presented during the proceedings of the committee.



   (b) There is no monetary liability on the part of, and no

cause of action for damages arising against, any member of an appointed peer

review board operated pursuant to written bylaws, for any act or proceeding

undertaken or performed within the scope of the functions of the board.



   (c) There is no monetary liability on the part of, and no

cause of action for damages arising against, any person on account of the

communication of information in the possession of that person to any peer

review board or the board of examiners in podiatry when the communication is

intended to aid in the evaluation of the qualifications, fitness, or character

of a practitioner of podiatry and does not represent as true any matter not

reasonably believed to be true.



   (d) Any peer review processes authorized by statute and

carried out in good faith have the benefit of the state action exemption to the

state antitrust law.



History of Section.

(P.L. 1988, ch. 274, § 2.)

Related Laws