Court Upholds Jury Findings in Poliner Peer Review Case

Many readers have been watching for developments on the Lawrence Poliner, M.D. peer-review-gone-wrong case.  Dr. Poliner is a Dallas cardiologist who was awarded more than $366 million in damages in 2004 as a result of a case he brought against Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas and three doctors who helped suspend his right to perform heart catheterizations there.

On Wednesday, March 29th, the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas upheld the basis for the jury's decision but not the damages.  The court ordered mediation to determine an appropriate damage award.

According to national health law firm Horty Springer, the court found that:

• Dr. Poliner was threatened with suspension of all of his hospital privileges if he did not agree to an abeyance of his cath lab privileges, even though the defendants did not have enough information at that time to determine whether he posed a danger to patients;
• Dr. Poliner was not offered any less severe options;
• None of the defendants would discuss the problem cases with Dr. Poliner; and
• Dr. Poliner was told he could not consult an attorney.
• By not raising some critical arguments earlier, the hospital had waived them.

Horty Springer is offering an audio conference program on April 12th ($220.00) to discuss the results of this case and how they affect medical staff peer review.   Click here for registration information.