nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
11,789
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 3:
Line 3: +
Moore v. Gunnison Valley Hosp. (view source)
Revision as of 19:01, April 12, 2008
, 19:01, April 12, 2008cat
The Court observed that "[t]here are no significant procedural safeguards" in [[peer review]] at a hospital. Moreover, there is a lack of "direct oversight by a government agency as well as a right to appeal to that agency." Instead, "there is very minimal and undefined oversight by the state medical board and no explicit right of appeal to that board."
The Court observed that "[t]here are no significant procedural safeguards" in [[peer review]] at a hospital. Moreover, there is a lack of "direct oversight by a government agency as well as a right to appeal to that agency." Instead, "there is very minimal and undefined oversight by the state medical board and no explicit right of appeal to that board."
[[category:Circuit Cases]]
[[category:Circuit Cases]]
[[category:Tenth Circuit]]
[[category:Judicial Immunity]]
[[category:Judicial Immunity]]
[[category:peer review]]
[[category:peer review]]