Larson v. Wasemiller

Facts

Mary Larson (Plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against Dr. James Wasemiller (Defendant) and Dr. Paul Wasemiller (Defendant), alleging they providing negligent care following surgery. Plaintiff also brought a claim against St. Francis Medical Center (the hospital) (Defendant), on the basis that the hospital should have known that James Wasemiller (Defendant) posed an unreasonable danger of harm to patients who undergo bariatric surgery. The hospital (Defendant) filed a motion to dismiss which the trial court denied, as they recognized a common-law cause of action for negligent credentialing or privileging. The trial court also determined that Minnesota's peer-review statute did not grant immunity or limit liability of a hospital or other review organization. The appeals court ruling found the Minnesota's peer-review statute confidentiality provisions (Minn. Stat. § 145.73–.64) did not indicate any legislative intent to create or recognize a cause of action for negligent credentialing or privileging, stating it was up to the state's supreme court or legislature to establish a new cause of action. The appeals court also held that while nothing in Minnesota's peer-review statute provides immunity from a negligent credentialing or privileging cause of action, Minn. Stat. § 145. 63 limits liability to unwarranted peer-review actions, given the facts available to the hospital or reviewing organization. The appeals court also held that Minn. Stat. § 145.64 prevents any disclosure of information that would appear necessary to an intelligent inquiry regarding whether a review committee acted with a reasonable belief that its action was warranted by known facts.