When court cases involving healthcare hit federal court, many hospitals and physicians are shocked to learn that what they thought was confidential peer or quality review information is brought out in discovery. In another example of this important difference between state and federal litigation, a US District Court sitting in NY ruled that peer review records could be obtained by a physician who sued for hostile work environment and employment discrimination over the hospital’s failure to reappoint her to her position of Assistant Director of anesthesiology.
The court acknowledged the state’s interest in promoting confidential peer review, but did not overcome the right to the information in a discrimination case.