U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. Thwarts Access to Morbidity/Mortality Findings
The consumerist group, Consumers’ Checkbook/Center for the Study of Services won its lawsuit in 2007 forcing the Dept. of Health and Human Services to release Medicare claims data which would have allowed researchers to determine the frequency with which physicians in several states performed certain procedures, and what results were achieved, according to today’s Medical News Today. The information would have helped health insurers evaluate physician quality, and would have allowed consumers to make better-informed decisions on which physicians to use, since the information was to have been posted on the internet for public viewing.
But, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia reversed that decision (of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia) last week, finding that the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) had been improperly utilized below. “Accordingly,” wrote Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson, “we need not balance the nonexistent public interest against every physician’s substantial privacy interest in the Medicare payments he receives.”
I guess Judge Henderson hadn’t bothered checking in with me before writing her decision. Maybe next time.
Fear of Lawsuits Prompts The Hartford’s Preemptive Strike Against Peanut Supplier
According to Alexandra D. Lahav, of the Mass Tort Litigation Blog, The Hartford has filed a declaratory judgement action against the Peanut Corporation of America, “presumably to avoid paying out on claims arising out of the spate of lawsuits we are about to see arising out of salmonella poisoning in peanut butter products.”
Ah, those ever thoughtful insurance companies. It is reassuring to know that The Hartford has seen the writing on the wall, and is doing everything in its power to avoid its obligations to the individuals who paid it for the “protection” of it’s insurance policies.
One-Man Medical Malpractice Machine Exhibits Litigious Tendencies
I love this story, which comes to us from West Virginia, courtesy of the Charleston Gazette. A local surgeon who managed to generate 124 medical malpractice lawsuits against himself in less than two years is apparently lawsuit-happy in a most unproductive way. He has sued the lawyers who defended him during hospital-initiated proceedings to terminate his privileges, among other things, and has sued just about everyone else who ever looked askance at the “quality” of his surgeries. Putnam General Hospital, at which Dr. John A. King racked up his impressive statistics, settled the suits involving King for approximately $100 million last year.
King also sued the Hospital Corporation of America, the parent company of his former workplace, Putnam General Hospital, which had restricted King’s priviliges following an independent investigation that concluded King was a “snake-oil salesman” and “criminal.”
For once, I have to agree with all the proponents of “tort reform.” Frivolous lawsuits really are a problem. But especially when they are instigated by an incompetent physician.