Jackson Lewis: New Mexico SC Rules Peer Review Confidentiality Protects Physician Reviewers from Adverse Employment Action | Practical Law

Jackson Lewis: New Mexico SC Rules Peer Review Confidentiality Protects Physician Reviewers from Adverse Employment Action | Practical Law

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis P.C. discusses Yedidag v. Roswell Clinic Corp., in which the New Mexico Supreme Court held that a physician peer-reviewing a colleague was protected by New Mexico's Review Organization Immunity Act (ROIA). In Yedidag, the court held that the physician's termination based on an administrator's reporting of the physician's conduct and tone during the peer review entitled the physician to a cause of action against his employer because ROIA protects him from facing adverse employment actions for participating in the peer review process. The court addressed the importance of confidentiality in the review process. The law firm publication highlighted employers' potential concerns that the Yedidag decision might provide immunity for medical staff behavior during the peer review process. However, it also noted that the court's decision does not conflict with an employer's contractual right to terminate an employee for cause, but simply prevents basing personnel decisions on information from confidential peer reviews.

Jackson Lewis: New Mexico SC Rules Peer Review Confidentiality Protects Physician Reviewers from Adverse Employment Action

by Jackson Lewis P.C.
Published on 27 Feb 2015New Mexico, United States
This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis P.C. discusses Yedidag v. Roswell Clinic Corp., in which the New Mexico Supreme Court held that a physician peer-reviewing a colleague was protected by New Mexico's Review Organization Immunity Act (ROIA). In Yedidag, the court held that the physician's termination based on an administrator's reporting of the physician's conduct and tone during the peer review entitled the physician to a cause of action against his employer because ROIA protects him from facing adverse employment actions for participating in the peer review process. The court addressed the importance of confidentiality in the review process. The law firm publication highlighted employers' potential concerns that the Yedidag decision might provide immunity for medical staff behavior during the peer review process. However, it also noted that the court's decision does not conflict with an employer's contractual right to terminate an employee for cause, but simply prevents basing personnel decisions on information from confidential peer reviews.