Defamation award could chill peer review

A Dallas cardiologist won $366 million in a lawsuit claiming a peer review panel intentionally ruined his career.

By Myrle Croasdale, AMNews staff. Oct. 4, 2004.

It's unusual to win a defamation award in a peer review case. Combine it with a jury award of $366 million and it becomes a verdict in a class of its own, legal experts said.

A judge could still toss out the award, and it's likely the decision will be appealed, yet the fact that a jury found a hospital and three of its physicians liable for unfairly suspending a cardiologist's privileges is sending shivers down the spines of physicians involved in the peer review process.

"This puts a very real question mark on our ability to police ourselves," said Warren Lichliter , MD, president of the Dallas County Medical Society.

Of the $366 million, the hospital is to pay $161 million, the hospital's chair of internal medicine $141 million, the head of the cardiac catheterization lab $32 million and the hospital's chief of cardiology $32 million.

The case is that of cardiologist Lawrence Poliner, MD, who convinced a Dallas federal district court jury that Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas and three of its physicians defamed him, violated his contract and inflicted emotional distress, his attorney said. Originally 10 physicians were named as defendants in the case.

"There's a lot of discussion of the chilling effect of this case and the verdict's effect on physicians' willingness to serve on peer review panels," said Michael Logan, Dr. Poliner's lead attorney. "Dr. Poliner's belief is that peer review is vital to the medical profession. Doctors policing themselves is important and has to be done.