A few years ago while working as a consultant I spoke to a hospital Medical Executive Committee about the need to (expeditiously) revise their medical staff bylaws. I outlined my areas of concern, and talked about the potential liability created by the existing language.
It was a pretty good speech if I do say so myself, but unfortunately, not quite good enough.
At the end of my presentation the CEO stood up and said "Just because it's in the bylaws doesn't mean we have to do it. I wouldn't worry about this if I were you." To which the members smiled and said, "Agreed, next agenda item please."
In retrospect, I should have "gotten in their faces" more. Instead I fumed and thought "why hire a consultant just to ignore the advice."
They should have listened, it cost them in the end. I didn't feel any satisfaction about that however, I felt disappointed that I hadn't done more to convince them of the importance of making the changes AND of following their bylaws.
I thought about that hospital when I was reviewing updates on the now famous Poliner v Texas Health System case, which forcefully demonstrates the importance of following your own bylaws.
On October 13, 2006 a federal district court in Texas ruled that Dr. Lawrence Poliner, a Dallas Cardiologist who won a 2004 jury award of $366 million in a "bad faith" peer review case, could either accept a reduced damages award of $22.5 million or face a new trial, limited to the issue of damages. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted a motion by Presbyterian Hospital Dallas (Texas Health Systems) and Dr. James Knochel to reduce the damage award for Dr. Poliner.
Upon the cardiologist's refusal to accept the reduced award, the court held that a new trial limited to the issue of damages would proceed.
From Horty Springer:
http://www.hortyspringer.com/data/cases/summary4/Poliner_v_Tex_Health_10132006.htm
From Medlaw Blog:
http://www.medlawblog.com/archives/credentialing-poliner-award-reduced-to-22-million-on-remittitur.html
Comments