Changes

In ''Bundren v. Parriott'', 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20258 (10th Cir. Aug. 24, 2007),  the U.S. Court of Appeals for the [[Tenth Circuit]] affirmed summary judgment in favor of a defendant physician who was accused of defaming another physician by filing a complaint against him with the [[American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists]] (ACOG).

In '''''Bundren v. Parriott''''', 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20258 (10th Cir. Aug. 24, 2007),  the U.S. Court of Appeals for the [[Tenth Circuit]] affirmed summary judgment in favor of a defendant physician who was accused of defaming another physician by filing a complaint against him with the [[American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists]] (ACOG).

The defendant physician had filed the complaint with ACOG against the other physician due to his testimony as an expert in a malpractice trial.  The trial court had granted [[summary judgment]] by concluding that the defendant physician "is not liable in damages for submitting his ACOG complaint, because the organization's grievance procedure is a 'professional review action' within the meaning of the Act."  On appeal, the [[Tenth Circuit]] disagreed with this analysis, noting that qualified immunity under [[HCQIA]] did not apply unless and until there was a finding that the ACOG proceeding satisfied the procedural requirements of [[HCQIA]].

The defendant physician had filed the complaint with ACOG against the other physician due to his testimony as an expert in a malpractice trial.  The trial court had granted [[summary judgment]] by concluding that the defendant physician "is not liable in damages for submitting his ACOG complaint, because the organization's grievance procedure is a 'professional review action' within the meaning of the Act."  On appeal, the [[Tenth Circuit]] disagreed with this analysis, noting that qualified immunity under [[HCQIA]] did not apply unless and until there was a finding that the ACOG proceeding satisfied the procedural requirements of [[HCQIA]].