The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that a man's online criticism of a physician is protected speech, according to a Star Tribune report.
The high court dismissed a case brought by neurologist David McKee, MD, after a patient's son posted critical comments about him on a website featuring physician ratings. One of the comments included an allegation that a nurse called Dr. McKee a "real tool." Dr. McKee claimed the comment was defamatory.
The Supreme Court ruled the online comments did not qualify as defamation because they are opinions that are protected as free speech, according to the report. The comment was defined as an opinion since the term "real tool" cannot be proven true or false.
Dr. McKee's lawyer said he and his client do not plan to appeal the ruling, according to the report.
Study: Malpractice Claims Go Unresolved for 4 Years of Average Physician's Career
Physician Not Responsible for PA's Improper Conduct, Rules Vermont Supreme Court
The high court dismissed a case brought by neurologist David McKee, MD, after a patient's son posted critical comments about him on a website featuring physician ratings. One of the comments included an allegation that a nurse called Dr. McKee a "real tool." Dr. McKee claimed the comment was defamatory.
The Supreme Court ruled the online comments did not qualify as defamation because they are opinions that are protected as free speech, according to the report. The comment was defined as an opinion since the term "real tool" cannot be proven true or false.
Dr. McKee's lawyer said he and his client do not plan to appeal the ruling, according to the report.
More Articles on Physicians and Lawsuits:
Montana Bill Would Protect Medical Homes From Antitrust SuitsStudy: Malpractice Claims Go Unresolved for 4 Years of Average Physician's Career
Physician Not Responsible for PA's Improper Conduct, Rules Vermont Supreme Court