Trinity Medical Center, Inc. v. Holum

How courts have described this case

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

• indicating that the scope of a peer-review protection act should not be limited “by the name employed to describe the committee and to thereby contradict legislative intent”
• “[A]lthough nearly every state has some form of statutory privilege for medical peer review, it appears that no two statutes, or courts’ interpretations of them, are alike.”
• “physicians . . . would not feel free to openly discuss the performance of other doctors practicing in the hospital, without assurance that their discussions in committee would be confidential and privileged”
• “Most of the courts which have directly addressed this issue [medical peer review privilege] have either required, or strongly encouraged, in camera review of the material for which the privilege is claimed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).