Ariz. Rev. Stat. » Title 36
Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-445 (2026)

Review of certain medical practices

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The governing body of each licensed hospital or outpatient surgical center shall require that physicians admitted to practice in the hospital or center organize into committees or other organizational structures to review the professional practices within the hospital or center for the purposes of reducing morbidity and mortality and for the improvement of the care of patients provided in the institution.  Such review shall include the nature, quality and necessity of the care provided and the preventability of complications and deaths occurring in the hospital or center. Such review need not identify the patient or doctor by name but may use a case number or some other such designation.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1972–2021 · leading case: John C. Lincoln Hosp. & Health Ctr. v. Superior Court, 768 P.2d 188 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
John C. Lincoln Hosp. & Health Ctr. v. Superior Court, 768 P.2d 188 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 17× “Lincoln Hospital and Health Center (Lincoln Hospital) from the trial court’s determination permitting documents asserted to be protected under peer review privilege, A.R.S. §§ 36-445 et seq., to be discovered.”
Yuma Reg'l Med. Ctr. v. Superior Court, 852 P.2d 1256 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 10× “The sole issue raised by this petition for special action is whether the trial court’s order requiring petitioner to furnish certain information, in accordance with uniform medical malpractice interrogatory # 17, violates the peer review privilege, A.R.S. §§ 36-445 et seq. *74…”
Humana Hosp. Desert Valley v. Superior Court, 742 P.2d 1382 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 6× “The Act states: § 36-445. Review of certain medical practices The governing body of each licensed hospital .”
Scappatura v. Baptist Hosp. of Phoenix, 584 P.2d 1195 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 7× “See A.R.S. § 36-445. We conclude that under Article III, Section E(l)(a) of the bylaws either Dr.”
Goodman v. Samaritan Health Sys., 990 P.2d 1061 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 5× “However, militating against effective peer review is the fact that it “is not only time consuming, unpaid work, it is also likely to generate bad feelings and result in unpopularity.”
Tucson Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Misevch, 545 P.2d 958 (Ariz. 1976). · cites it 4× “To guarantee the proper review of medical practices within hospitals, the legislature enacted A.R.S. § 36-445 et seq. “The governing body of each licensed hospital shall require that physicians admitted to practice in the hospital organize into committees to review the…”
Samaritan Health Sys. v. Superior Court, 981 P.2d 584 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 5× “” Furthermore, peer review is statutorily required for all hospitals in the state, see A.R.S. § 36-445; therefore clarification of hospitals’ exposure to suit from the peer review process is of statewide importance.”
Gilbert v. Bd. of Med. Examiners, 745 P.2d 617 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 3× “then the peer review demanded by A.R.S. § 36-445 will become an empty formality, if undertaken at all.”
Takieh M.D. v. O'Meara M.D., 497 P.3d 1000 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “¶26 “Arizona courts have recognized that the confidentiality of peer review committee proceedings is essential to achieve complete investigation and review of medical care.”
Hourani v. Benson Hosp., 122 P.3d 6 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “The only legal action which may be maintained by a licensed health care provider based on the performance or nonperformance of such duties and functions is an action for injunctive relief seeking to correct an erroneous decision or procedure.”
Sun Health Corp. v. Myers, 70 P.3d 444 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “A.R.S. § 36-445 (1993) imposes on the medical governing bodies the duty to conduct peer review evaluations.”
Azore, LLC v. Bassett, 341 P.3d 466 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “See A.R.S. §§ 36-445, -445.01. Therefore, consistent with our holding, because the report would have existed regardless of the quality assurance committee, the privilege does not attach.”
Show all 24 citing cases →
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.