Third Time’s A Charm: California Re-Introduces Proposed Changes to Proposition 65’s Warnings and Safe Harbor Requirements -
On October 27, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), the lead...more
California health care employers that apply mandatory vaccination policies objectively can take great comfort in a recent California Court of Appeal decision. In Hodges v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, the court found...more
In response to multiple requests from California hospital industry members, the California Court of Appeal ordered publication of its decision in Bonni v. St. Joseph Health System et al. This important decision is a victory...more
9/23/2022
/ Anti-SLAPP ,
Appeals ,
CA Supreme Court ,
California ,
Defamation ,
Disciplinary Proceedings ,
Healthcare Workers ,
Hospitals ,
Peer Review ,
Retaliation ,
Reversal ,
Settlement Negotiations
In Khoiny v. Dignity Health, the California Court of Appeal held that hospital residency programs are primarily employment programs and medical residents are primarily employees. Therefore, courts should not give special...more
In Scheer v. Regents of the University of California, the Second District Court of Appeal held that the McDonnell-Douglas burden-shifting framework applies to claims asserted pursuant to Health & Safety Code Section 1278.5....more
In Natarajan v. Dignity Health, the Supreme Court rejected a physician’s challenge to a peer review hearing officer based on alleged financial bias. In doing so, the Court gave hospitals helpful and long-needed guidance...more
On September 24, 2020, the California Court of Appeal shed additional light on meeting the public interest requirements in anti-SLAPP motions in its opinion of Murray v. Tran (Cal. Ct. App., Sept. 24, 2020, No....more
Natarajan addressed an important question: When may physicians who are the subject of a peer review hearing challenge the hearing officer in their cases on the ground that the hearing officer is biased?
We have published a...more