Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 5-37.3-7 (2026)

Medical peer-review boards

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section RI-LEGwebserver.rilegislature.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter, healthcare providers may make confidential healthcare information available to medical peer-review boards without authorization.

(b) Confidential healthcare information before a medical peer-review board shall remain strictly confidential, and any person found guilty of the unlawful disclosure of that information shall be subject to the penalties provided in this chapter.

(c) Except as provided in this section, the proceedings and records of medical peer-review boards shall not be subject to discovery or introduction into evidence. No person who was in attendance at a meeting of that board shall be permitted or required to testify as to any matters presented during the proceedings of that board or as to any findings, recommendations, evaluations, opinions, or other actions of that board or any members of the board. Confidential healthcare information discoverable or admissible from original sources shall not be construed as immune from discovery or use in any proceeding merely because that information was presented during proceedings before that board, nor is a member of that board or other person appearing before it to be prevented from testifying as to matters within his or her knowledge and in accordance with the other provisions of this chapter, but that witness cannot be questioned about his or her testimony or other proceedings before that medical peer-review board or about opinions formed by him or her as a result of those proceedings.

(d) The provisions of subsection (c) limiting discovery and testimony shall not apply in any legal action brought by a medical peer-review board to restrict or revoke a physician’s hospital staff privilege, or his or her license to practice medicine, or to cases where a member of the medical peer-review board or the legal entity that formed this board or within which that board operates is sued for actions taken by that board; provided, that in this legal action, personally identifiable confidential healthcare information shall not be used without written authorization of the person or his or her authorized representative or upon court order.

(e) Nothing in this chapter shall limit the authority, which may be provided by law, of the board of medical licensure and discipline to require a medical peer-review board to report to it any disciplinary actions or recommendations of that board, or to transfer to it records of that board’s proceedings or actions, including confidential medical information, or restrict or revoke a physician’s license to practice medicine; provided, that in this legal action, personally identifiable confidential healthcare information shall not be used without written authorization of the person or his or her authorized representative or upon court order.

(f) No member of a medical peer-review board, nor the legal entity that formed or within which that board operates nor any person providing information to that board, shall be criminally or civilly liable for the performance of any duty, function, or activity of that board or based upon providing information to that board, provided this action is without malice and is based upon a reasonable belief that the action is warranted.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1983–2009 · leading case: Pastore v. Samson, 900 A.2d 1067 (R.I. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Pastore v. Samson, 900 A.2d 1067 (R.I. 2006). · cites it 17× “1956 § 23-17-25 and G.L.1956 § 5-37.3-7. For the following reasons, we affirm in part and reverse in part.”

In Re Bd. of Med. Review Investigation, 463 A.2d 1373 (R.I. 1983). · cites it 3× “) Nonetheless, § 5-37.3-7(e) specifies that “[njothing in this chapter shall limit the authority, which may otherwise be provided by law, of the board of medical review to require a medical peer review committee to report to it any disciplinary actions or recommendations of such…”

Sanderson v. Frank S. Bryan, M.D., Ltd., 522 A.2d 1138 (Pa. 1987). “1984-85); R.I.Gen.Laws § 5-37.3-7 (Supp.1984); S.D.”

Bennett v. Kent Cnty. Mem'l Hosp., 623 F. Supp. 2d 246 (D.R.I. 2009). · cites it 4× “” R.I. Gen. Laws § 5-37.3-7(c). In addition, any person who attends a medical peer-review meeting is precluded from testifying “as to any matters presented during the proceedings of that board or as to any findings, recommendations, evaluations, opinions, or other actions of…”

— R.I. Gen. Laws § 5-37.3-7(c) — 2 cases

Pastore v. Samson, 900 A.2d 1067 (R.I. 2006). “1956 § 23-17-25 and G.L.1956 § 5-37.3-7. For the following reasons, we affirm in part and reverse in part.”

Bennett v. Kent Cnty. Mem'l Hosp., 623 F. Supp. 2d 246 (D.R.I. 2009). “” R.I. Gen. Laws § 5-37.3-7(c). In addition, any person who attends a medical peer-review meeting is precluded from testifying “as to any matters presented during the proceedings of that board or as to any findings, recommendations, evaluations, opinions, or other actions of…”

— R.I. Gen. Laws § 5-37.3-7(d) — 1 case

Pastore v. Samson, 900 A.2d 1067 (R.I. 2006). “1956 § 23-17-25 and G.L.1956 § 5-37.3-7. For the following reasons, we affirm in part and reverse in part.”

— R.I. Gen. Laws § 5-37.3-7(e) — 2 cases

In Re Bd. of Med. Review Investigation, 463 A.2d 1373 (R.I. 1983). “) Nonetheless, § 5-37.3-7(e) specifies that “[njothing in this chapter shall limit the authority, which may otherwise be provided by law, of the board of medical review to require a medical peer review committee to report to it any disciplinary actions or recommendations of such…”

Pastore v. Samson, 900 A.2d 1067 (R.I. 2006). “1956 § 23-17-25 and G.L.1956 § 5-37.3-7. For the following reasons, we affirm in part and reverse in part.”

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.