The California Supreme Court has upheld whistle-blower protections for a physician who claims he was fired out of retaliation, ruling that he does not need to exhaust other legal remedies before filing such a claim, according to a Modesto Bee report.
Nephrologist Mark Fahlen, MD, filed suit in March 2011 in Stanislaus County Superior Court after Sacramento-based Sutter Health canceled his privileges to care for patients at Memorial Medical Center in Modesto, Calif., according to the report.
Dr. Fahlen alleged Sutter Central Valley Hospitals and the COO of Memorial Medical Center, Steve Mitchell, persuaded Modesto-based Sutter Gould Medical Foundation to fire him. He claimed the parties terminated his privileges because of his complaints from 2004 through 2008 about insubordination and substandard care by hospital nurses.
Per state legislation, whistle-blower protections in California were extended to physicians on a hospital medical staff in 2007 — before then, the existing whistle-blower law protected only patients and hospital employees.
But the hospitals claim Dr. Fahlen filed suit under a section of the statute that makes the action improper, because the alleged retaliation involved an adverse peer review decision about his privileges. Dr. Fahlen did not seek judicial review of the decision to revoke his privileges. Instead, he sued the hospital and asserted a whistleblower retaliation claim. In short, the defendants alleged Dr. Fahlen took a legal shortcut.
Attorneys for Sutter argued that Dr. Fahlen first needed to exhaust other legal remedies or a writ process before bringing the whistle-blower lawsuit, but the Supreme Court dismissed the previous expectation that physicians exhaust other administrative and legal remedies before filing suit with claims of retaliation. Such conditions would "seriously undermine the Legislature's purpose to afford a whistle-blower on a hospital medical staff the right to sue," the Supreme Court's opinion said, according to the report.
The hospital industry has kept an eye on this case, with the California Hospital Association and groups such as Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Scripps Health and Dignity Health filing friend-of-the-court briefs on behalf of the defendants, according to the report. The American Medical Association filed a brief in support of Dr. Fahlen.
Sutter Health released a statement, saying that "in the very narrow issue addressed in the decision, the court did not express any view on the merits of Dr. Fahlen's retaliation claim," according to the report.
Dr. Fahlen reportedly intends to continue with the lawsuit to regain privileges at Memorial. He said the ruling means "doctors no longer have to choose between speaking out for their patients or continuing with their careers," according to the report.
More Articles on Hospital Lawsuits:
Justice Dept. Joins Whistle-Blower Suit Against Tenet, HMA
Hospitals Not Always Liable for Employee Breach of Patient Data
Settlement Proposed in Overtime Lawsuit Against Wilkes-Barre General