Mary Hayashi
- Democratic
Author
Existing law provides for the professional review of specified healing arts licentiates through a peer review process conducted by peer review bodies, as defined. This bill would encourage a peer review body to obtain external peer review, as defined, for the evaluation or investigation of an applicant, privilegeholder, or member of the medical staff in specified circumstances. This bill would require a peer review body to respond to the request of another peer review body and produce the records reasonably requested concerning a licentiate under review, as specified. The bill would specify that the records produced pursuant to this provision are not subject to discovery, as specified, and may only be used for peer review purposes. Existing law requires the governing body of acute care hospitals to give great weight to the actions of peer review bodies and authorizes the governing body to direct the peer review body to investigate in specified instances. Where the peer review body fails to take action in response to that direction, existing law authorizes the governing body to take action against a licentiate. This bill would prohibit a member of a medical or professional staff from being required to alter or surrender staff privileges, status, or membership solely due to the termination of a contract between that member and a health care facility, except as specified. The bill would specify that a peer review body is entitled to review and make timely recommendations to the governing body of a health care facility, and its designee, if applicable, regarding quality considerations relating to clinical services when the selection, performance evaluation, or any change in the retention or replacement of licensees with whom the facility has a contract occurs. The bill would require the governing body to give great weight to those recommendations. Existing law provides various due process rights for licentiates who are the subject of a final proposed disciplinary action of a peer review body, including authorizing a licensee to request a hearing concerning that action. Under existing law, the hearing must be held before either an arbitrator selected by a process mutually acceptable to the licensee and the peer review body or a panel of unbiased individuals, as specified. Existing law prohibits a hearing officer presiding at a hearing held before a panel from, among other things, gaining direct financial benefit from the outcome. This bill would additionally require the hearing officer to be an attorney licensed in California, except as specified, and to disclose all actual and potential conflicts of interest, as specified. The bill would specify that the hearing officer is entitled to determine the procedure for presenting evidence and argument and would give the hearing officer authority to make all rulings pertaining to law, procedure, or the admissibility of evidence. The bill would authorize the hearing officer to recommend termination of the hearing in certain circumstances. Existing law requires the peer review body to adopt written provisions governing whether a licensee may be represented by an attorney and prohibits a peer review body from being represented by an attorney where a licensee is not so represented, except as specified. This bill would give both parties the right to be represented by an attorney but would prohibit a peer review body from being represented if the licensee notifies the peer review body within a specified period of time that he or she has elected to not be represented, except as specified.
Vetoed by Governor.
Enrolled and to the Governor at 4:45 p.m.
Senate amendments concurred in. To enrollment. (Ayes 74. Noes 0. Page 6379.)
Assembly Rule 77 suspended. (Page 6373.)
Read third time, passed, and to Assembly. (Ayes 33. Noes 0. Page 4602.)
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 20 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
Read second time. To third reading.
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (March 22).
Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(c).
(Page 2830.)
Read second time. To third reading.
From inactive file.
(Corrected February 24.)
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
To second reading.
To inactive file on motion of Senator Cedillo.
Read second time. To third reading.
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
From committee: Amend, do pass as amended, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (July 15).
Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on APPR.
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on L. & I.R.
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
Read third time, passed, and to Senate. (Ayes 51. Noes 22. Page 1861.)
Read second time. To third reading.
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 13. Noes 4.) (May 28).
Re-referred to Com. on APPR. pursuant to Joint Rule 10.5.
Read second time. To third reading.
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (May 13).
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. & E. Read second time and amended.
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. & E. Read second time and amended.
Read first time.
From printer. May be heard in committee March 30.
Introduced. To print.
| Bill Text Versions | Format |
|---|---|
| AB1235 | HTML |
| 02/27/09 - Introduced | |
| 04/14/09 - Amended Assembly | |
| 05/04/09 - Amended Assembly | |
| 05/18/09 - Amended Assembly | |
| 06/16/09 - Amended Senate | |
| 07/23/09 - Amended Senate | |
| 02/16/10 - Amended Senate | |
| 08/24/10 - Enrolled |
| Document | Format |
|---|---|
| No related documents. |
Data on Open States is updated periodically throughout the day from the official website of the California State Legislature.
If you notice any inconsistencies with these official sources, feel free to file an issue.