Opinion ID: 2233405
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: false reports

Text: McLeay argues that no immunity exists for false databank reports when made with the knowledge they are false. He argues that Bergan never made a finding that he was incompetent or negligent or that he had committed malpractice, and he contends the evidence shows that Bergan knew the NPDB reports were false. As previously discussed, all actions for damages are subject to immunity under the HCQIA. Section 11137(c), however, provides: No person or entity . . . shall be held liable in any civil action with respect to any report made under this subchapter. . . without knowledge of the falsity of the information contained in the report. Reporting of peer review actions is mandated by the HCQIA. Here, McLeay sought damages for several causes of action, including defamation. A defamation action seeking damages is subject to HCQIA immunity. See, generally, Lee v. Trinity Lutheran Hosp., 408 F.3d 1064 (8th Cir.2005); Bryan v. James E. Holmes Regional Medical Center, 33 F.3d 1318 (11th Cir.1994). The record shows that the Bergan representative who filed the reports lacked personal knowledge of their accuracy and was relying on the actions of the review board and reporting its findings. Nor does the record indicate knowledge by Bergan that the reports were false. They simply reported the findings of the committee. See Odom v. Fairbanks Memorial Hosp., 999 P.2d 123 (Alaska 2000). We determine that McLeay's claims about false reporting are subject to the immunity provisions of the HCQIA and that McLeay failed to present evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption for summary judgment.