(a) The decisions, opinions, actions and proceedings rendered, entered or acted upon in good faith and without malice and on the basis of facts reasonably known or reasonably believed to exist of any committee of physicians or surgeons, acting as a committee of the Medical Association of the State of Alabama, or any state, county, or municipal medical association or society, or as a committee of any licensed hospital or clinic, or the medical staff thereof, undertaken or performed within the scope and function of such committee as legally defined herein shall be privileged, and no member thereof shall be liable for such decision, opinion, action, or proceeding.
(b) Within the words and meaning of this section, a committee shall include one formed or appointed as a utilization review committee, or similar committee, or committee of similar purpose, to evaluate or review the diagnosis or treatment or the performance of medical services which are performed with respect to private patients or under public medical programs of either state or federal design, with respect to any physical or mental disease, injury, or ailment or to define, maintain, or apply the professional or medical standards of the association, society, hospital, clinic, or medical staff from, by, or for which it was appointed.
(Acts 1971, No. 2277, p. 3668, §§1, 2; Acts 1976, No. 693, p. 960, §2.)
Notes of Decisions
Ex Parte St. Vincent's Hosp., 652 So. 2d 225 (Ala. 1994).
· cites it 7× “Vincent's refused to allow the deponents to respond to questions regarding the action taken by the hospital in response to the letter, claiming that it was privileged pursuant to § 34-24-58 and § 22-21-8, Ala.Code 1975. Zeneca then sought discovery of the letter and documents…”
Roby v. Fairfield Nursing & Rehab. Ctr., L.L.C., 22 So. 3d 445 (Ala. 2009).
· cites it 4× “Vincent's states: "The discovery sought by Zeneca is not privileged under either § 22-21-8 or § 34-24-58. The Infection Control Committee is a standing hospital committee, coordinated by Becky Harrison, a registered nurse.”
Marshall v. Planz, 145 F. Supp. 2d 1258 (M.D. Ala. 2001).
· cites it 4× “physician, physician auxiliary personnel, or other provider of health care and information, documents, or records otherwise available from oi iginal sources are not to be construed as immune from discovery or use in any civil proceedings merely because they were presented during…”
Ex Parte Cryer, 814 So. 2d 239 (Ala. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Code 1975, § 34-23-74 (relating to handling of drugs in a general hospital, skilled nursing homes, and extended-care facilities that do not operate a pharmacy); Ala.Code 1975, § 34-24-58 (the decisions, opinions, etc.”
Ex Parte Anderson, 789 So. 2d 190 (Ala. 2000).
· cites it 2× “Section 34-24-59(c) builds upon the foundation laid by § 34-24-58, by requiring that "[a]ny report [of formal disciplinary action related to professional ethics, medical incompetence, moral turpitude, or drug or alcohol abuse, resulting in termination, reduction, or resignation…”
Chalal v. Nw. Med. Ctr., Inc., 147 F. Supp. 2d 1160 (N.D. Ala. 2000).
“Code § 34-24-58. In this case, because Dr. Chalal alleged that the Hospital conducted peer review improperly, the parties agreed that the hospital was entitled to utilize confidential peer review material in its defense of Dr.”
Newton v. Anesthesia Servs. of Birmingham, 652 So. 2d 225 (Ala. 1994).
· cites it 6× “Vincent’s refused to allow the deponents to respond to questions regarding the action taken by the hospital in response to the letter, claiming that it was privileged pursuant to § 34-24-58 and § 22-21-8, Ala.Code 1975. Zeneca then sought discovery of the letter and documents…”
Lindsay v. Baptist Health Sys., Inc., 154 So. 3d 90 (Ala. 2014).
“Utilization-Review-Committee Privilege Section 34-24-58, Ala.Code 1975, protects from legal action the acts of any physicians’ committee of a licensed hospital, but only if the committee’s decisions were made “in good faith and without malice and on the basis of facts reasonably…”
Ala. Code § 34-24-58(a): 1 case
Marshall v. Planz, 145 F. Supp. 2d 1258 (M.D. Ala. 2001).
“physician, physician auxiliary personnel, or other provider of health care and information, documents, or records otherwise available from oi iginal sources are not to be construed as immune from discovery or use in any civil proceedings merely because they were presented during…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.