Printable Format65-442. Limited liability for medical care facilities and certain duly appointed officials thereof; good faith requirement. (a) There shall be no liability on the part of, and no action for damages shall arise against, any duly appointed member of the governing board or the duly appointed member of a committee of the medical staff of a licensed medical care facility for any act, statement or proceeding undertaken or performed within the scope of the functions and within the course of the performance of the duties of such committee of the medical staff if such member acted in good faith and without malice, and the medical staff operates pursuant to written bylaws that have been approved by the governing board of the medical care facility.
(b) There shall be no liability on the part of and no action for damages shall arise against any licensed medical care facility because of the rendering of or failure to render professional services within such medical care facility by a person licensed to practice medicine and surgery if such person is not an employee or agent of such medical care facility.
History: L. 1967, ch. 344, § 1; L. 1971, ch. 205, § 1; L. 1973, ch. 248, § 12; L. 1976, ch. 267, § 1; July 1.
Cross References to Related Sections:
"Medical care facility" defined in 65-425.
Limited liability for certain associations of health care providers, see 65-4909.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Hospitals' Role and Responsibility in Health Care Delivery," Alan Rupe, Robert D. Steiger, 14 W.L.J. 580, 597 (1975).
"Recent Legislation: The Kansas Approach to Medical Malpractice," Nancy Neal Scherer and Robert P. Scherer, 16 W.L.J. 395, 407 (1977).
"Medical Malpractice 1976: An Update on Change," Lee J. Dunn, Jr., 45 J.B.A.K. 173, 175 (1976).
"Medical Malpractice—The Kansas Law," Wayne T. Stratton, J.D., 81 J.K.M.S. 505, 508, (1980).
"PEER Review—A Risk Analysis," Wayne T. Stratton, 87, No. 11, Kan.Med. 313, 334 (1986).
"Hospital Staff Privileges and Liability," Wayne T. Stratton, 94, No. 10, Kan.Med. 260 (1993).
"Hospital Ethics Committees in Kansas," Marta Fisher Linenberger, 63 J.K.B.A. No. 10, 38, 43 (1994).
"Survey of Kansas Tort Law: Part II," William E. Westerbeke, 50 K.L.R. 225 (2002).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Hospital committee records, staff committee minutes, peer review notes or self-evaluation and policing information subject to trial court's discretion. Wesley Medical Center v. Clark, 234 Kan. 13, 28, 669 P.2d 209 (1983).
2. Cited; suit by doctor against hospital for demotion on staff; operation of hospital not a public governmental function. Jiricko v. Coffeyville Mem. Hosp. Med. Ctr., 628 F. Supp. 329 (1985).
3. Cited in holding as tax exempt, property stored in Kansas of not-for-profit Missouri hospital corporation authorized as Kansas not-for-profit corporation. Board of Johnson County Comm'rs v. St. Joseph Hosp., 241 Kan. 613, 619, 738 P.2d 454 (1987).
4. Whether hospitals are immune from liability regarding rendering or failure to render professional services by nonemployee physicians examined; whether health care provider may be sued for negligence in failing to ensure competence of nonemployee physicians examined. McVay v. Rich, 18 Kan. App. 2d 746, 753, 859 P.2d 399 (1993).
5. Whether hospital may employ physicians examined; corporate practice of medicine discussed. St. Francis Regional Med. Center v. Weiss, 254 Kan. 728, 739, 869 P.2d 606 (1994).
6. Whether hospital is immune from suit alleging corporate negligence in employing independent contractor physicians examined. McVay v. Rich, 255 Kan. 371, 372, 377, 874 P.2d 641 (1994).
7. No violation of § 1 or 18 of Bill of Rights of Kansas Constitution; section provides adequate substitute remedy for the abrogation of the plaintiffs' remedy to sue for corporate negligence. Lemuz v. Fieser, 261 Kan. 936, 937, 938, 944, 933 P.2d 134 (1997).
8. Verdict hospital 100% at fault in medical malpractice action unreconcilable with record; verdict either contrary to evidence or instructions. Aldoroty v. HCA Health Services of Kansas, Inc. 265 Kan. 666, 681, 684, 962 P.2d 501 (1998).
9. Trial court conclusion confirmed that facts come within ambit of peer review activities but summary judgment reversed because of absence of facts determinative of malice or good faith. Smith v. Farha, 266 Kan. 991, 996, 974 P.2d 563 (1999).
10. Members of peer review committee who acted in good faith and without malice are immune from liability even if their actions are negligent and conclusions are wrong. Donnell v. HCA Health Services of Kansas, Inc., 29 Kan. App. 2d 426, 28 P.3d 420 (2001).
11. Statements made by two doctor defendants were made within confines of peer review committee; granting of summary judgment affirmed. Davis v. Hildyard, 34 Kan. App. 2d 22, 113 P.3d 827 (2005).