Venosh v. Henzes, 121 A.3d 1016 (Pa. Super. 2015), appeal denied by 2016 Pa. Lexis 357 (Pa., Mar. 1, 2016)

Pennsylvania Supreme Court declines review of the Venosh opinion, which refused to extend the confidentiality provisions of the Peer Review Protection Act to an investigation initiated by a health insurance provider.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has denied review of Venosh v. Henzes, et al., causing confusion regarding the circumstances in which the privileges of the Peer Review Protection Act (PRPA) attach to an investigation involving the provision of health care. In the Venosh opinion, the Pennsylvania Superior Court determined that a quality review process initiated by a non-party health insurance provider is not confidential under the PRPA. The court’s decision to not review Venosh forces Pennsylvania courts to continue to interpret the PRPA in a piecemeal fashion, performing fact-specific, case-by-case determinations as to whether the PRPA applies to a specific peer review process. As a result of the Venosh opinion, in order to receive the protections of the PRPA, health care providers must ensure that each investigation originates from the health care provider, not from an outside, non-health care provider third party.

 

Case Law Alerts, 2nd Quarter, April 1, 2016

Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2016 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.