Physicians - What Justifies a Summary Suspension in California Medical Peer Review?

In California hospital peer review, a summary suspension allows immediate restriction or revocation of a physician's clinical privileges without a full evidentiary hearing. This emergency measure prioritizes patient safety when imminent danger exists. Understanding the legal standards, due process implications, and challenges is crucial for physicians facing peer review actions.

1. Who Decides the Legal Standard for Summary Suspension?

California's peer review framework is governed by statutes in the Business & Professions Code § 809 et seq., which balance patient protection with physician rights. The California Supreme Court in Natarajan v. Dignity Health (2021) 11 Cal.5th 1095 emphasized two equal goals:

• Excluding practitioners who provide substandard care or engage in misconduct.
• Protecting competent physicians from arbitrary or discriminatory actions.

This ruling promotes an objective standard, favoring neither patient safety nor physician rights exclusively.

However, summary suspensions under Business & Professions Code § 809.5(a) create an exception. This section overrides standard due process protections (§§ 809–809.4) and grants peer review bodies broad authority to:

"Immediately suspend or restrict clinical privileges... where failure to take that action may result in an imminent danger to the health of any individual," followed by notice and hearing rights.

Physicians on the Medical Executive Committee (MEC) wield this power with significant legal immunities, even if they lack formal legal training. The process is loosely defined, bypassing traditional fairness principles.

2. How Does Summary Suspension Impact Physician Due Process?

Summary suspensions apply to risks involving specific patients or unidentified future patients. Courts uphold this based on the Legislature's overriding interest in public safety (Medical Staff of Sharp Memorial Hosp. v. Superior Court (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 173).

In practice:

• Patient safety takes precedence; physician due process is subordinate.
• Hospitals' determinations receive deference: "It should not be faulted for considering patient safety as its principal obligation" (Sharp Memorial, at 183).

For private hospitals, fair procedure rights stem from statutes, not constitutional due process (Sadeghi v. Sharp Memorial Medical Center Chula Vista (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 598).

3. What Is the Legal Standard for Upholding a Summary Suspension?

The burden is low: The hospital must show by a preponderance of the evidence that the suspension was reasonable and warranted based on facts known at the time (Lin v. Board of Directors of PrimeCare Medical Network, Inc. (2025) 108 Cal.App.5th 1163).

It does not require proving the underlying accusations will hold up under full scrutiny—only that imminent danger justified immediate action.

4. What Legal Challenges Exist to a Summary Suspension?

Physicians receive input opportunities per hospital bylaws, but no statutory guidelines dictate the scope. Challenges occur in limited post-suspension hearings, which rarely succeed due to the emergency context.

Key principles:

• Success does not require exoneration on the merits; later findings of innocence do not invalidate the initial suspension (Nesson v. Northern Inyo County Local Hospital Dist. (2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 65).
• Evidence is evaluated at the time of decision, not retrospectively.
• Core question: Did the MEC have a reasonable belief that unrestricted practice posed harm to future patients?

Judicial review is deferential, making overturns uncommon.

Protect Your Medical Privileges: Consult a California Peer Review Attorney

Summary suspensions can devastate a physician's career, even if later overturned. If facing peer review in California, seek experienced legal counsel specializing in medical staff privileges, summary suspensions, and Business & Professions Code § 809. Early intervention maximizes due process protections.   Daniel Horowitz knows the law and is an experienced hearing and trial lawyer.  

Physician Lawyers

There are many excellent physician defense firms that specialize in representing doctors.  Our medical lawyers at the Law Office of Daniel Horowitz strongly fight for the rights of doctors and we can move quickly and effectively to maximize your position in a conflict with medical staff and the MEC.  Our firm has extensive trial experience and a reputation for out of the box solutions and physician centered focus and advocacy.