Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 50-16-201 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TITLE 50. HEALTH AND SAFETY

CHAPTER 16. HEALTH CARE INFORMATION

Part 2. Professional Review Committees

Definitions

50-16-201. Definitions. As used in this part, the following definitions apply:

(1) (a) "Data" means written reports, notes, or records or oral reports or proceedings created by or at the request of a utilization review, peer review, medical ethics review, quality assurance, or quality improvement committee of a health care facility that may be shared with a medical practitioner, including the medical practitioner being reviewed, and that are used exclusively in connection with quality assessment or improvement activities, including the professional training, supervision, or discipline of a medical practitioner by a health care facility. The term includes all subsequent evaluations and analysis of an untoward event, including any opinions or conclusions of a reviewer.

(b) The term does not include:

(i) incident reports or occurrence reports; or

(ii) health care information that is used in whole or in part to make decisions about an individual who is the subject of the health care information.

(2) "Health care facility" has the meaning provided in 50-5-101.

(3) (a) "Incident report" or "occurrence report" means a written business record of a health care facility that:

(i) may be but is not required to be created by the staff involved in response to an untoward event, such as a patient injury, adverse outcome, or interventional error, for the purpose of ensuring a prompt evaluation of the event; and

(ii) is a factual rendition of the event.

(b) The terms do not include any subsequent evaluation of the event created by or at the request of a utilization review, peer review, medical ethics review, quality assurance, or quality improvement committee, regardless of whether or not the subsequent evaluation of the event occurred in response to an incident report or occurrence report. The creation of an incident report or occurrence report is not a condition precedent for a subsequent evaluation of an event, and any subsequent evaluation of an event remains privileged and confidential pursuant to this part, regardless of the creation of an incident report or occurrence report.

(4) "Medical practitioner" means an individual licensed by the state of Montana to engage in the practice of medicine, osteopathy, podiatry, optometry, or a nursing specialty described in 37-8-202 or licensed as a physician assistant pursuant to 37-20-203.

History: En. Sec. 4, Ch. 104, L. 1969; R.C.M. 1947, 69-6304; amd. Sec. 1, Ch. 359, L. 2001; amd. Sec. 5, Ch. 396, L. 2003; amd. Sec. 124, Ch. 467, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 25, Ch. 519, L. 2005; amd. Sec. 2, Ch. 265, L. 2013.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2000–2020 · leading case: Huether v. Dist. Court of the Sixteenth Jud. Dist. of Montana, 2000 MT 158 (Mont. 2000).
Huether v. Dist. Court of the Sixteenth Jud. Dist. of Montana, 2000 MT 158 (Mont. 2000). · cites it 12× “Section 50-16-201, MCA, defines the "data," which "shall be confidential," as: written reports, notes, or records of tissue committees or other medical staff committees in connection with the professional training, supervision, or discipline of the medical staff of hospitals.”
Cole v. St. James Healthcare, 2008 MT 453 (Mont. 2008). · cites it 4× “James asks us to determine whether the Board complied with its Bylaws in denying Dr. Cole's application for reappointment, and whether the Matovich investigation is privileged from discovery under § 37-2-201, MCA, and § 50-16-201, MCA.”
State v. Vainio, 2001 MT 220 (Mont. 2001). “The hospital resisted disclosure by pointing to §§ 50-16-201 through 205, MCA, which provide for confidentiality of information and proceedings of medical peer review committees.”
Mooring v. 18th Jud. Dist. (Mont. 2020). · cites it 4× “After conducting its in camera review, the District Court determined "all material reviewed at the Peer Review are 'data' as defined by § 50-16-201, MCA[,]and are confidential and not discoverable pursuant to § 50-16-205, MCA.”
Mont. Code Ann. § 50-16-201(3)(a): 1 case
Mooring v. 18th Jud. Dist. (Mont. 2020). “After conducting its in camera review, the District Court determined "all material reviewed at the Peer Review are 'data' as defined by § 50-16-201, MCA[,]and are confidential and not discoverable pursuant to § 50-16-205, MCA.”
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.