Taylor v. Kennestone Hospital, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a physician’s defamation claim against a hospital based on an NPDB report was meritless because he failed to present evidence from which a jury could reasonably infer that the reports to the data bank were both false and malicious
• noting that board rejected recommendations of medical executive committee and hearing panel and denied physician’s application for reappointment
• finding \no evidence from which a jury could reasonably infer\ that defendants' decision to deny plaintiff's job reapplication \was motivated by malice\
• finding “no evidence from which a jury could reasonably infer” that defendants’ decision to deny plaintiff’s job reapplication “was motivated by malice”
• HCQIA only preempts that state law to the extent the federal and state laws conflict
• HCQIA only preempts that state law to the extent the federal and state laws conflict

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).