Cal. Codes » Business and Professions Code / DIVISION 2. HEALING ARTS / CHAPTER 1. General Provisions / ARTICLE 11. Professional Reporting
California Codes

Cal. Business and Professions Code § 809.05 (2026)

Professional Reporting

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

It is the policy of this state that peer review be performed by licentiates. This policy is subject to the following limitations:

(a)The governing bodies of acute care hospitals have a legitimate function in the peer review process. In all peer review matters, the governing body shall give great weight to the actions of peer review bodies and, in no event, shall act in an arbitrary or capricious manner.

(b)In those instances in which the peer review body’s failure to investigate, or initiate disciplinary action, is contrary to the weight of the evidence, the governing body shall have the authority to direct the peer review body to initiate an investigation or a disciplinary action, but only after consultation with the peer review body. No such action shall be taken in an unreasonable manner.

(c)In the event the peer review body fails to take action in response to a direction from the governing body, the governing body shall have the authority to take action against a licentiate. Such action shall only be taken after written notice to the peer review body and shall fully comply with the procedures and rules applicable to peer review proceedings established by Sections 809.1 to 809.6, inclusive.

(d)A governing body and the medical staff shall act exclusively in the interest of maintaining and enhancing quality patient care.

(e)It is not the intent or purpose of this section to prohibit or discourage public members on state licensing boards and medical quality review committees from participating in disciplinary actions as authorized by law.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2004–2025 · leading case: Ellison v. Sequoia Health Servs., 183 Cal. App. 4th 1486 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ellison v. Sequoia Health Servs., 183 Cal. App. 4th 1486 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “This policy is subject to the following limitations: [][] (a) The governing bodies of acute care hospitals have a legitimate function in the peer review process. In all peer review matters, the governing body shall give great weight to the actions of peer review bodies and, in…”
Weinberg v. Cedars-Sinai Med. Ctr., 15 Cal. Rptr. 3d 6 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004). “05, Subdivision (a) Weinberg’s contentions hinge on the standard for the Board’s decision delineated in Business and Professions Code section 809.”
Michalski v. Scripps Mercy Hosp., 221 Cal. App. 4th 1033 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013). “05, subdivision (a) has been interpreted to mean that a hospital governing body may exercise its own independent judgment about evidence presented to a peer review committee *1044 composed of medical staff, provided that it gives due weight to the findings of that committee and…”
Najibi v. Providence Valley Serv. Area Cmty. Ministry Bd. CA2/2 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025). “) In this regard, Business and Professions Code section 809.”
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.