Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Anti-SLAPP Statutes and Peer Review
Hospitals trying to assemble a peer review committee to review another practitioner's record and perhaps impose sanctions for substandard performance have their jobs cut out for them because physicians are often reluctant to pass judgment on a colleague. In addition to this natural reticence, those who sit on or testify at a peer review proceeding have another reason to want to avoid it: the threat of lawsuits brought by the medical practitioner facing discipline. The scope of the problem is obvious: without willing and honest participants, the peer-review system that helps keep patients safe is compromised.
In recent years, a small number of people sued by disgruntled medical practitioners for statements made before hospital peer review and state licensing boards have attempted to scuttle those suits by using state-law anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statutes. SLAPP suits are, by definition, meritless suits brought not to win, but to use the litigation to deter, intimidate or punish citizens who either will or have reported violations of law, written to government officials or testified before governmental bodies. Duracraft Corp. v. Holmes Products Corp., 427 Mass. 156 (1998). Anti-SLAPP legislation has been passed in several states, including California, Delaware, Georgia, New York, Minnesota, Ten-nessee and others. Can this legislation help participants in peer review and other medical competence proceedings when the person who was the subject of the proceeding cries 'Defamation!' or 'Interference with contractual relations?' The law is developing, and some recent decisions show that the answer to that question is still open to interpretation.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.