Don’t Forget: Medical Societies Have a Duty to Provide Fair Procedure Too
A recent decision by the United States District Court, Eastern District of California highlights the duty of medical societies to provide fair procedure when implementing a disciplinary action. In VanBuren Lemons v. American Association of Neurological Surgeons, Inc., et.al, Dr. VanBuren Lemons sued the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, Inc. (AANS) for defamation, after a hearing panel found that he violated certain AANS ethics rules. This case is a reminder that medical societies are also subject to fair procedure.
Case Background
Dr. Lemons has been a practicing neurosurgeon in California since 1992. AANS is an Illinois based corporation and an association of neurosurgeons that provides educational information to its members.
Plaintiff, Dr. Lemons has been identified as a qualified expert in Sacramento, Placer and Stanislaus counties. Dr. Lemons testified as an expert witness in a medical malpractice lawsuit against another AANS member. Dr. Lemons opined that the other member’s treatment of a patient fell below the standard of care, causing the patient injury. Thereafter, the other member submitted a complaint with AANS regarding Dr. Lemons’ criticisms of him. Dr. Lemon resigned from AANS, but AANS refused to accept his resignation and a disciplinary hearing was held in 2019 to determine if Dr. Lemons’ conduct of testifying as an expert against another member was unprofessional per AANS rules.
The hearing lasted less than a day. The members of the hearing panel authored a report finding that Dr. Lemons had violated various AANS Rules for Neurosurgical Medical/Legal Expert Opinions Services. About a year later, the AANS board of directors voted to suspend Dr. Lemons’ membership for a year. A notice of this disciplinary action was published on the internet via the ANNS newsletter
Legal Issue and Outcome
Dr. Lemons sued AANS for defamation in federal court. AANS moved to dismiss, and the Court granted the motion with leave to amend. While the issues discussed in the Court’s Order are primarily jurisdictional, the Court acknowledged that, as a medical society, AANS has to afford members a quasi-judicial procedure for members to challenge discipline. The Court cites to cases affirming that physicians must first set aside the outcomes of these decisions before suing for damages. This means that Dr. Lemons would have to first set aside AANS’ suspension in a writ of mandate proceeding before suing for defamation.
Key Takeaway in Health Law Context
While most peer review takes place in hospital medical staffs, this case is an important reminder that other entities are peer review bodies too. All peer review bodies—including medical societies—should be aware of their duties to afford fair procedure if an individual’s membership or professional standing is restricted, suspended, or terminated. This includes adequate notice and opportunity to respond required in all California peer review proceedings. These principles ensure that the hearing process is fair, objective and allows for an opportunity for an individual to defend themselves in adverse situations, whether it be at a hospital or a medical association. Fair procedure is not only appropriate, it also maximizes protections against lawsuits by physicians challenging disciplinary action in court.
