O.C.G.A.
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
As used in this article, the term ‘‘medical review committee’’ means a committee of a state or local professional society or of a medical staff or a licensed hospital, nursing home, medical foundation, or peer review committee, provided the medical staff operates pursuant to written bylaws that have been approved by the governing board of the hospital or nursing home, which committee is formed to evaluate and improve the quality of health care rendered by providers of health service or to determine that health services rendered were professionally indicated or were performed in compliance with the applicable standard of care or that the cost of health care rendered was considered reasonable by the providers of professional health services in the area.
History
Ga. L. 1975, p. 739, § 1; Code 1981, § 31-7-140, enacted by Ga. L. 1983, p. 3, § 22.
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS ‘‘Medical review committee’’ means a ‘‘grass roots’’ committee formed to make in-house examinations of the adequacy of the treatment afforded patients. Davenport v. Kutner, 182 Ga. App. 467, 356 S.E.2d 67, rev’d on other grounds, 257 Ga. 456, 360 S.E.2d 586 (1987).
Composite state board of medical examiners is not a ‘‘medical review committee’’ within the meaning of O.C.G.A. § 31-7-140. Davenport v. Kutner, 182 Ga. App. 467, 356 S.E.2d 67, rev’d on other grounds, 257 Ga. 456, 360 S.E.2d 586 (1987).
Failure of a medical review committee to strictly adhere to bylaws does not strip the committee of the protection of confidentiality otherwise afforded by O.C.G.A. § 31-7-143. Patton v. St. Francis Hosp., 246 Ga. App. 4, 539 S.E.2d 526 (2000). Surgical conference organized by a hospital’s chief of staff pursuant to written bylaws for the purpose, in part, to evaluate and improve the quality of health care rendered by members of the
vascular surgery staff and to otherwise critique the performance of individual doctors in cases involving that area of medicine, which functioned as an initial, rather than determinative, step in the hospital’s peer review process, was a medical review committee entitled to the confidentiality and privileges of O.C.G.A. § 31-7-143. Poulnott v. Surgical Assocs., 179 Ga. App. 138, 345 S.E.2d 639 (1986). Cited in Emory Univ. v. Houston, 185 Ga. App. 289, 364 S.E.2d 70 (1987).
Notes of Decisions
Emory Clinic v. Houston, 369 S.E.2d 913 (Ga. 1988).
· cites it 32× “678, 681 ( 279 SE2d 430 ) (1981), this Court held that OCGA § 31-7-140 et seq., should be narrowly construed as it is in derogation of the policy favoring discovery.”
Emory Univ. v. Houston, 364 S.E.2d 70 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 12× “, the “peer review” statute, and OCGA § 31-7-140 et seq., the “medical review” statute.”
Poulnott v. Surgical Assocs. of Warner Robins, P.C., 345 S.E.2d 639 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 8× “” “Medical review committee” is defined in OCGA § 31-7-140 (Code Ann. § 88-3201) as “a committee of a state or local professional society or of a medical staff or a licensed hospital, nursing home, medical foundation, or peer review committee, provided the medical staff operates…”
Hosp. Auth. of Valdosta & Lowndes Cnty. v. Meeks, 678 S.E.2d 71 (Ga. 2009).
· cites it 4× “OCGA § 31-7-140. "`Peer review' means the procedure by which professional health care providers evaluate the quality and efficiency of services ordered or performed by other professional health care providers.”
Davenport v. Kutner, 356 S.E.2d 67 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 8× “§ 88-3201) as ‘a committee of a state or local professional society or of a medical staff or a licensed hospital, nursing home, medical foundation, or peer review committee, provided the medical staff operates pursuant to written bylaws that have been approved by the governing…”
Jenkins v. Dekalb Cnty., 242 F.R.D. 652 (N.D. Ga. 2007).
· cites it 2× “Brickhouse responded by noting that he “object[ed] to providing this document based upon O.C.G.A. § 31-7-140 et seq., commonly referred to as Georgia’s medical review privilege.”
Kutner v. Davenport, 360 S.E.2d 586 (Ga. 1987).
· cites it 4× “Three issues are involved in determining the admissibility of the notices at issue: First, whether the Board is a “medical review committee” within the meaning of OCGA § 31-7-140 so that the notices are inadmissible under OCGA § 31-7-143; second, whether the notices are records…”
Patton v. St. Francis Hosp., 539 S.E.2d 526 (Ga. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 4× “He bases this argument on OCGA § 31-7-140, which defines a medical review committee as a committee of a medical staff or peer review committee, “provided the medical staff operates pursuant to written bylaws.”
Doe v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., 891 F. Supp. 607 (N.D. Ga. 1995).
· cites it 2× “, or Georgia’s medical review statute, O.C.G.A. §§ 31-7-140 et seq. Defendant argues that the items sought are those that would be “otherwise available from original sources,” a category of information expressly made non-privileged by the statutes, and that its subpoenas are…”
Crosby v. Hosp. Auth. of Valdosta, 873 F. Supp. 1568 (M.D. Ga. 1995).
“§§ 31-7-140 to -143 (1991). Finally, it is the policy of the State of Georgia to confer antitrust immunity on local governing authorities “in the exercise of powers specifically granted to them by law____” Id.”
Baldwin Cnty. Hosp. Auth. v. Wright, 413 S.E.2d 484 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “289 ( 364 SE2d 70 ) (1987) recognized differences in the medical review statute, OCGA § 31-7-140 et seq. and the peer review statute, OCGA § 31-7-130 et seq.”
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.