Changes

''Sugarbaker v. SSM Health Care'', 190 F.3d 905 (8th Cir. 1999) (applying [[HCQIA]] immunity to affirm a grant of summary judgment against a [[Sherman Act]] claim for the restriction and then termination of hospital medical staff privileges of a physician).

''Sugarbaker v. SSM Health Care'', 190 F.3d 905 (8th Cir. 1999) (applying [[HCQIA]] immunity to affirm a grant of summary judgment against a [[Sherman Act]] claim for the restriction and then termination of hospital medical staff privileges of a physician).

''Tshibaka v. Sernulka'', 673 Fed. App’x. 272 (4th Cir. 2016) (hospital “[i]mmunity applies unless—viewing the totality of the circumstances in an objectively reasonable manner—the aggrieved physician rebuts the presumption that the professional review action satisfied HCQIA.”  The [[Fourth Circuit]] thereby affirmed a district court grant of [[summary judgment]] to the hospital and its CEO, while remanding in favor of plaintiff's claim for defamation).

''Tshibaka v. Sernulka'', 673 Fed. App’x. 272 (4th Cir. 2016) (hospital “[i]mmunity applies unless—viewing the totality of the circumstances in an objectively reasonable manner—the aggrieved physician rebuts the presumption that the professional review action satisfied HCQIA.”  The [[Fourth Circuit]] thereby affirmed a district court grant of [[summary judgment]] to the hospital and its CEO, while remanding in favor of plaintiff's claim for defamation; no mention of antitrust or Sherman Act in this case).

''Wahi v. Charleston Area Med. Ctr.'', 562 F.3d 599, 601 (4th Cir. 2009) ("The district court concluded most of Wahi's claims were barred because CAMC qualified for immunity from suit under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act ("HCQIA" or "the Act"), 42 U.S.C.A. § 11101, et seq. (West 2005). For this reason, and because the district court found Wahi's other claims failed on the merits, the court awarded CAMC and [its Executive VP and CMO] summary judgment.").

''Wahi v. Charleston Area Med. Ctr.'', 562 F.3d 599, 601 (4th Cir. 2009) ("The district court concluded most of Wahi's claims were barred because CAMC qualified for immunity from suit under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act ("HCQIA" or "the Act"), 42 U.S.C.A. § 11101, et seq. (West 2005). For this reason, and because the district court found Wahi's other claims failed on the merits, the court awarded CAMC and [its Executive VP and CMO] summary judgment.").