Legal Opinion

Mileikowsky v. West Hills Hospital & Medical Center

California Supreme Court

Decided April 6, 2009No. S156986PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WERDEGAR, J.

California's statutory peer review process, Business and Professions Code section 809 et seq., provides a physician with the right to a hearing for the purpose of reviewing a hospital peer review committee’s recommendation to deny the physician’s application for reappointment to staff privileges. A hearing officer may be appointed to preside at the hearing, but the officer is prohibited by statute from acting as a prosecutor or advocate or from voting on the merits. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 809.2, subd. (b).)1 The merits are determined by the trier of fact, often a panel drawn…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Arnett v. Dal CieloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Anton v. San Antonio Community HospitalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Kibler v. Northern Inyo County Local Hospital DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  4. Miller v. Eisenhower Medical CenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  5. Alexander v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. Fahlen v. Sutter Central Valley HospitalsCalifornia Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Smith v. Selma Community HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  3. El-Attar v. Hollywood Presbyterian Medical CenterCalifornia Supreme Court · 2013
  4. Nesson v. Northern Inyo County Local Hospital DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  5. Shahinian v. Cedars-Sinai Medical CenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API