California Physician Peer Review Defense Attorney | Sham Peer Review Lawyer
Peer Review Defense Attorney in California
1. Attorney Expertise in Peer Review Defense
Daniel Horowitz and his team of physician peer review attorneys specialize in defending physicians facing peer review. The peer review defense process often begins with the shock of a summary suspension. Other times the peer review process starts with an informal inquiry and a request for a written response to vague quality of care questions. Peer review lawyers should be contacted as soon as possible as these informal inquiries are the initial steps in a much more formal - and threatening process.
2. Identifying Sham Peer Review
Our expert physician lawyers identify and defend against sham peer review. A medical staff privileges suspension defense also includes identifying retaliation, targeting for competitive reasons and invented charges based upon personal dislike and discrimination.
With a proven track record against sham peer review and retaliatory peer review, Daniel Horowitz looks to extricate his clients from a legal process that never favors the physician. Peer review ostensibly is a fair and balanced inquiry but under the guise of “patient safety” the process always places the doctor on the defense.
3. Disruptive Physician
Our legal team has defended many false “disruptive physician” claims. These claims involve false allegations that a doctor is disruptive when in fact the doctor is being assertive and strong and acting in the interest of the patient.
4. Poor Performance Allegations
Top physicians often see their work critiqued by less qualified colleagues which results in peer review. Our attorney-physician Dr. Mark Ravis cuts through the nonsense and prepares effective defenses to these allegations. In addition to Dr. Ravis we work with Brookes Hammock, a physician defense attorney formerly with the medical board of Ohio and Molly Northrup a highly experienced physician hearing expert.
Call the Horowitz Medical Group at 925-291-5388
What is Physician Peer Review?
The AMA defines good faith peer review this way:
Good Faith Peer Review. Peer review conducted with honest intentions that assess appropriateness and medical necessity to assure safe, high-quality medical care is good faith peer review. Misfeasance (i.e., abuse of authority during the peer review process to achieve a desired result other than improved patient care), or misuse of the peer review process, or peer review that is politically motivated, manipulated to achieve economic gains, or due to personal vendetta is not considered a good faith peer review. (AMA Peer Review)
In reality peer review is often punitive and retaliatory. The AMA has discussed sham peer review this way:
Sham Peer Review
Bad-faith, or “sham” peer review, may be politically motivated, manipulated to achieve economic gains or to avoid financial risks, conducted in a way that helps the organization avoid reputational damage or is facilitated to fulfill a personal vendetta against an individual. The peer review process may also be exploited to deem the whistleblower incompetent or disruptive, undermining the merits of their report. Such inappropriate peer reviews were the subject of AMA Board of Trustees Report 24-A-08, titled “Inappropriate Peer Reviews,” which described several cases of improperly motivated peer review, including Patrick v Burget (1998), Rosenblit v Superior Court (1991), Clark v Columbia/HCA Information Services (2001), and Poliner vs Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas (2006). (AMA Sham Peer Review)
The Horowitz office understands that peer review can be weaponized with false accusations of clinical deficiencies, orchestrated “disruptive physician” accusations and workplace harassment. It is often the least qualified physicians who weaponize peer review to eliminate workplace competitors. The investigation that leads to formal peer review (and worse - to summary suspension) - is rarely conducted in the open. Rumors are exploited to create claimed realities. Friends in the medical community often abandon the subject doctor out of fear of the power of the investigative committee. The targeted doctor is suddenly confronted with accusations and is given only days or at best a few weeks to develop a defense. Worse - putting on a defense can be viewed as a sign of lack of cooperation. This lack of cooperation can be used against the doctor to show that the refusal to admit error creates a danger to patients and hence a summary suspension without a hearing may be imposed.
For these reasons doctors who have even a sense that an investigation is starting are wise to contact expert peer review attorney's so that they can begin their defense at the earliest possible time. If you need an initial consultation the Horowitz office can be reached at (925) 291-5388.
Read More about Sham Peer Review.
THE BASIC RULES OF PEER REVIEW
The basic rules of peer review are:
Mandated by Law: Clinical peer review is mandated by federal law and can be implemented through federal or state-based rules and procedures.
Purpose: Enacted by Congress to protect patients and establish a consistent basis for evaluating and improving physician performance. While patient safety is the main theme, clearing the reputation of innocent physicians is an important responsibility of a peer review committee.
Process: Involves retrospective chart review, interviews with witnesses, and physician input. Negotiated resolutions are common but the process provides for peer reviewing hearings with both sides presenting evidence.
Primary Entity: Organized Medical Staff assesses the quality of patient care and establishes procedures and committees to enforce quality standards. The peer review process is part of that quality assurance responsibility. In a hospital setting the governing board has ultimate authority.
Responsibilities: The organized medical staff handles educational, disciplinary, or punitive aspects of peer review. The medical staff will have its own attorney separate from that of the hospital. The medical staff by-laws, which are approved by the hospital board, establish the specific rules governing peer review.
Recommendations: Peer review bodies can suggest further education, limitations on privileges, proctoring, suspension, or termination of privileges. Summary suspension is a powerful tool and usually triggers reporting to the medical board and/or National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB).
Due Process: Hearing procedures ensure due process and fairness, with an appellate process for review by a Superior Court judge. In practice, fair hearing practice can vary widely although genuinely balanced and reasoned outcomes are possible.
What Does a Peer Review Defense Lawyer Do?
A. Lawyer as Peacemaker (if Possible)
A physician peer review attorney is part negotiator and part litigator. Dr. Mark Ravis (MD/JD) and Daniel Horowitz look for common ground shared by our doctors and investigating medical staff committees so that fractured relationships can be repaired, and our doctors can return to their normal life and normal practice. (With sham peer review this process is difficult as the termination of privileges and imposition of sanctions is the intended purpose of the hijacked peer to peer review process.)
B. Lawyers Fighting Sham or Unfair Peer Review
If a fair resolution is impossible our attorneys will present a medically valid defense to the allegations. We will raise standard and creative defenses based upon existing law and law that is developing and favorable to our doctors. We vigorously cross examine adverse medical witnesses using our very extensive trial experience. As a veteran of thousands of hearings and hundreds of jury trials, few lawyers can match the courtroom experience of Daniel Horowitz. As client oriented lawyers we are acutely aware that the hearing process is emotionally painful, unfairly expensive and has no guarantee of victory. When we are forced into a battle to protect your career we always respect and acknowledge your feelings, financial interests and your long term accomplishments and goals.
About Our Physician Lawyers
The Horowitz Physician Defense Law Group, led by Daniel Horowitz specializes in providing comprehensive physician defense for doctors facing Medical Board peer review and sham peer review.
Daniel Horowitz is a veteran of over 200 jury trials and literally thousands of medical, administrative and government hearings. He is a Top 100 Trial Lawyer, 10 Rated by AVVO, AV Rated by Martindale Hubbell, a California “Super Lawyer”, former law school professor and television legal commentator. Daniel's cases defending doctors have been front page news in the San Francisco Chronicle and medical-legal work has been recognized nationwide.
The experienced legal team includes Physician and Lawyer Mark Ravis. Dr. Ravis is fully licensed as both an attorney and medical doctor. Dr. Ravis is a staunch defender of doctors and specializes in fighting against peer review and sham peer review. If you have repeated your medical defense over and over only to see blank stares from people who should understand, Dr. Ravis is the person you need. His is brilliant and totally dedicated to protecting physicians.
Molly Northrup is an attorney who has worked on some of the most complex medical-legal cases in recent years. She has worked on the John Muir Hospital cases that drew California Senator Padilla and Congressman DeSaulnier to launch an investigation into JMH's pediatric unit. She worked on the Alicia Kalamas whistleblower case and the Judson Brandeis $ 2 million dollar victory against his former medical group. Her trial preparation expertise often teams her with Daniel Horowitz when the case is high stakes and highly contested.
Physician defense lawyer Brookes Hammock is renowned for his technical skills and cutting edge legal analysis. Brookes was formerly with the medical board of Ohio. If there is a technical defense to the charges, Brookes will research and document those defenses for speedy resolutions or effective appellate review. (Brookes is licensed in Ohio and Pennsylvania).
To Reach our Medical Board License Defense Attorneys call: (925) 291-5388.
Blogs on Peer Review
What Constitutes the Actual Start of Peer Review
The AMA, Due Process & Peer Review
Rules Governing an MEC Summary Suspension
How to Respond to Peer Review
How to Select the Best Peer Review Lawyer
Peer review proceedings and especially summary suspension proceedings can arise unexpectedly, prompting many doctors to seek help from family friends, malpractice lawyers, or medical practice business attorneys. However, the best peer review lawyers are subject matter experts with extensive experience in peer review proceedings. Peer review is both an art and a science, requiring unscripted, judgment-based decisions.
The medical peer review process is a quasi-judicial proceeding that incorporates elements of fairness and due process. When an evidentiary hearing is scheduled, there is no substitute for a top-tier trial lawyer. Effective evidence preparation, witness preparation, and the battle-tested skills of a seasoned trial lawyer can be the deciding factor between success and failure. Daniel Horowitz has led thousands of contested evidentiary hearings and jury trials, making him the best choice for peer review investigations and, if necessary, for a contested peer review hearing.
The Horowitz Medical Law Group, led by Daniel Horowitz, comprises the most experienced medical lawyers and paralegals.
Call the Horowitz Medical Group at 925-291-5388
Client Testimonials
-
He is approachable but serious. Mr. Horowitz is the perfect balance of what someone wants in a lawyer. Not only is he approachable enough to gain and value your trust, but he's a bulldog in the courtroom. Despite his kindness, I have never once doubted his ability to provide me with THE BEST representation in court. I'm so thankful to have found a lawyer capable of such a delicate balancing act.Molly A.
-
Dan Horowitz was the best attorney I could have asked for during a difficult time in my career. From the moment I met him, I felt believed, respected, and safe. He and his team were endlessly responsive and empathetic to me and my family. He fought for my case day and night, always keeping my best interests at the forefront of his mind. As I learned from Dan, it is never a good time in one’s life to need legal representation - but if you need it, Dan is your person, your advocate, and your best friend. We are forever grateful for his tireless commitment to justice for the people.Katherine
-
He is very tough. He made me listen to him and work his way. He was right. It worked. I won my case and I am very lucky.Avvo Reviewer
-
My experience with Dan was great. I appreciate the knowledge Dan has and the professionalism they exhibit. I would highly recommend the Law Office Of Daniel Horowitz. My family and I are truly grateful we worked with him.Brandon D.
