Case Name: Eleanor REGINELLI and Orlando Reginelli v. Marcellus BOGGS, M.D., and Monongahela Valley Hospital, Inc. and UPMC Emergency Medicine, Inc., d/b/a Emergency Resource Management, Inc. Petition of Monongahela Valley Hospital, Inc.
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2016-07-07
Citations: 141 A.3d 440
Docket Number: 
Parties: Eleanor REGINELLI and Orlando Reginelli v. Marcellus BOGGS, M.D., and Monongahela Valley Hospital, Inc. and UPMC Emergency Medicine, Inc., d/b/a Emergency Resource Management, Inc. Petition of Monongahela Valley Hospital, Inc.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 141
Pages: 440–440

Head Matter:
Eleanor REGINELLI and Orlando Reginelli v. Marcellus BOGGS, M.D., and Monongahela Valley Hospital, Inc. and UPMC Emergency Medicine, Inc., d/b/a Emergency Resource Management, Inc. Petition of Monongahela Valley Hospital, Inc.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
July 7, 2016.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
AND NOW, this 7th day of July, 2016, the Petitions for Allowance of Appeal are GRANTED, limited to the following issues, as stated by petitioners:
1. Whether the Superior Court erred by holding an outside medical provider's peer review proceedings regarding its employees who staff a hospital's Emergency Department under a contract with that hospital are not entitled to protection from disclosure under the Pennsylvania Peer Review Protection Act?
2. Whether the sharing of peer review records by a third-party medical provider that operates a hospital's Emergency Department with the administration of that hospital constitutes a waiver of peer review protection as to those records?
3. Whether a hospital that contracts with a third-party medical provider to operate the hospital's Emergency Department may claim protection under the Peer Review Protection Act for records of peer review proceedings conducted by the medical . provider regarding its employees who staff the hospital's Emergency Department?
These matters are to be listed for argument with the petitions granted at 40, 41 & 42 WAL 2016.