|
2006AP1521 Rechsteiner v. Hazelden
Torts
Medical peer reviews
Diagnosis during a medical peer review process is immune from liability, even if negligently performed.
"We conclude that the record before us indicates that Hazelden is eligible for immunity under Wis. Stat. § 146.37 because it played an integral role in Spooner's medical peer review process. Hazelden's medical diagnosis of Dr. Rechsteiner is immune, even if its diagnosis is deemed negligent, because Hazelden's diagnosis was central to its requested evaluation. If Dr. Rechsteiner's complaint is viewed as focusing on Hazelden's treatment of Dr. Rechsteiner, as opposed to its diagnosis of Dr. Rechsteiner, the complaint cannot survive summary judgment."
Affirmed.
2006AP1521 Rechsteiner v. Hazelden
Prosser, J.
Attorneys: For Appellant: Drill, James A., New Richmond; Schmiege, Anne E., New Richmond; For Respondent: Solheim, Mark A., St. Paul, MN; Bjorkman, Louise Dovre, St. Paul, MN
Case Details
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
