Crow v. Penrose-St. Francis Healthcare Sys.

In Crow v. Penrose-St. Francis Healthcare Sys., 169 P.3d 158 (Oct. 15, 2007), the Colorado Supreme Court held that a physician's ability to obtain judicial relief when his hospital staff privileges have been suspended depends on his prior completion of the peer review process.

The Penrose-St. Francis Healthcare System ("the Hospital") asked the Court to overturn a trial court ruling allowing Dr. Jimmie R. Crow to bring a civil action against the Hospital seeking injunctive relief and asserting common law claims arising out of the Hospital's peer review of Crow before that peer review process has been completed. The Hospital argued that Crow's claims were not ripe because he had failed to exhaust his administrative remedies of completing the peer review process. Exercising its original jurisdiction pursuant to C.A.R. 21, the Court issued a rule to show cause and now make that rule absolute.

The Court held that pursuant to the Colorado Professional Review Act ("the CPRA"), sections 12-36.5-101 to -203, C.R.S. (2007), a physician must exhaust all peer review committee administrative remedies before seeking relief in court. This exhaustion requirement, found in subsections 12-36.5-106(7) and (8), applies even though the physician is seeking money damages for common law claims arising out of the process, rather than challenging the board's final decision. Because the Hospital's governing board has not rendered a final decision in his matter, the Court found that Dr. Crow had not exhausted his available administrative remedies, and his case is not ripe for judicial review.