El-Attar v. Hollywood Presybterian Med. Ctr. 8/19/11 CA2/4

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » California » Court of Appeal » 2011 » El-Attar v. Hollywood Presybterian Med. Ctr. 8/19/11 CA2/4

State: California

Court: 1st District Court of Appeal 1st District Court of Appeal

Docket No: B209056

Case Date: 11/30/2011

Preview:Filed 8/19/11

CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR OSAMAH A. EL-ATTAR, Petitioner and Appellant, v. HOLLYWOOD PRESBYTERIAN MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant and Respondent. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mary Ann Murphy, Judge. Reversed and remanded. Lurie, Zepeda, Schmalz & Hogan, Kurt L. Schmalz, and Neeru Jindal for Petitioner and Appellant. Christensen & Auer, Jay D. Christensen, and Anna M. Suda for Defendant and Respondent. Francisco J. Silver and Astrid G. Meghrigian for California Medical Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Respondent. B209056 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BS105623)

*

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rules 8.1105(b) and 8.1110, this opinion is certified for publication with the exception of part II of the Discussion.

This case concerns a hospitals peer review procedure in the case of a physician who is denied reappointment to the medical staff. The hospital bylaws governing peer review hearings in such cases call for a hearing panel made up of physicians selected by an elected executive committee of the medical staff. We hold that in the absence of a bylaw provision to the contrary, the elected committee must appoint the hearing panel, and cannot delegate this task to the governing board of the hospital. Appellant Osamah El-Attar, M.D., was a medical staff member at respondent Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center (Hospital). In fall 2002, he applied for reappointment to the medical staff. His application was reviewed by the medical staffs Medical Executive Committee (MEC), which recommended that his application be approved. The Governing Board of Hospital denied the application, and appellant requested a peer review hearing to challenge the Governing Boards discussion. The Queen of Angels-Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center Medical Staff Bylaws (Bylaws), adopted by the medical staff and approved by the Governing Board of Hospital, provided that in a case such as this, the peer-elected MEC appoints the members of the hearing panel to hear the case. Nevertheless, in this instance, the MEC acted to delegate that authority to the Governing Board. That body appointed a hearing panel which ultimately ruled against appellant. Following the hearing, the appellants medical staff membership and privileges were terminated. Appellant petitioned for a writ of admin0istrative mandate, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5. His petition was denied. On appeal, he makes several claims of error with respect to the selection of the hearing panel and the procedures it followed in hearing the case. We decide only one: whether the panel was properly constituted. We hold that it was not because selection of the hearing panel by

2

the Governing Board violated the Bylaws, depriving appellant of the hearing to which he was entitled. We therefore reverse the trial courts ruling denying relief.
1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY Pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 809, Hospital employs a peer review process to evaluate a physicians performance and conduct for various purposes, including applications for appointment and reappointment to the medical staff and disciplinary action against a physician. The Bylaws prescribe the structure of the peer review process. The Bylaws outline the respective roles of Hospitals Governing Board and the medical staff in that process. The Governing Board has final say on appointment applications (Bylaws, art. V,

Download El-Attar v. Hollywood Presybterian Med. Ctr. 8/19/11 CA2/4.pdf