Photo: Shutterstock
"In light of the fact that the Supreme Court assumed that documents in a credentialing file are not peer review documents and in this case, the documents at issue are peer review documents, it would be helpful for the Supreme Court to grant allocatur and address this issue directly," the Superior Court panel wrote.
February 13, 2020 at 05:30 PM
1 minute read
The Pennsylvania Superior Court has urged the state Supreme Court to clarify a key aspect of a 2018 decision in which the justices limited the scope of the Peer Review Protection Act.
A three-judge panel of the Superior Court in Leadbitter v. Keystone Anesthesia Consultants unanimously affirmed an Allegheny County trial court’s order requiring defendant St. Clair Hospital to produce to plaintiffs in a medical malpractice case the unredacted credentialing file of defendant Dr. Carmen Petraglia.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
