Code of Alabama

Ala. Code § 34-24-59 (2026)

Reporting of Physician Disciplinary Actions.

✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaAla. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The chief administrative officer of each hospital shall report to the Alabama State Board of Medical Examiners any disciplinary action taken concerning any physician when the action is related to professional ethics, negligence, or incompetence in the practice of medicine, moral turpitude, sexual misconduct, abusive or disruptive behavior, or drug or alcohol abuse. Disciplinary action shall include termination, revocation, probation, restriction, denial, failure to renew, suspension, reduction, or resignation of hospital privileges for any of the above reasons. The report shall be in writing and be made within 30 days of the date of the initial action. Failure on the part of a chief administrative officer of a hospital to file a report required under this section shall be a violation of Section 22-21-25(b)(3), and the State Board of Health may, in its discretion, impose upon the hospital found to be in violation, a civil monetary penalty in an amount not to exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for each violation. All monies collected pursuant to this section shall be retained by the Alabama Department of Public Health and may be expended for any legal purpose including, but not limited to, operational expenses of the department.

(b) Any professional society within this state comprised primarily of physicians, which takes formal disciplinary action against a member shall report the action to the Alabama State Board of Medical Examiners, when the action taken is related to professional ethics, negligence, or incompetence in the practice of medicine, moral turpitude, sexual misconduct, abusive or disruptive behavior, or drug or alcohol abuse. This report shall be in writing and made within 30 days of the action.

(c) Any report made pursuant to this section shall be privileged from discovery and the individual making the report shall be immune from liability.

(Acts 1981, No. 81-685, p. 1155, §§ 1-3; Acts 1995, No. 95-199, p. 310, §1; Act 2002-140, p. 359, §1.)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2000–2018 · leading case: Ex Parte Anderson, 789 So. 2d 190 (Ala. 2000).
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). · cites it 4× “§ 11133 and Ala. Code § 34-24-59 . The court will discuss each of the four requirements for immunity under 42 U.”
In re Est. of Elliott by & through Windham, 272 So. 3d 1021 (Ala. 2018). “Section 34-24-59 of the Code of Alabama [1975] "d.”
In re Est. of Elliott by & through Windham, 272 So. 3d 1021 (Ala. 2018). “Section 34-24-59 of the Code of Alabama [1975] "d.”
— Ala. Code § 34-24-59(a) — 2 cases
Ex Parte Anderson, 789 So. 2d 190 (Ala. 2000). “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). “§ 11133 and Ala. Code § 34-24-59 . The court will discuss each of the four requirements for immunity under 42 U.”
— Ala. Code § 34-24-59(c) — 1 case
Ex Parte Anderson, 789 So. 2d 190 (Ala. 2000). “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…”
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.