The Maryland Supreme Court recently decided Adventist Health Care v. Behram. Dr. Berham served as a physician at Shady Grove Hospital. The Hospital twice suspended his privileges. In lieu of a hearing about his conduct, the Hospital and Dr. Berham reached a settlement agreement. After -- and in exchange for -- the Hospital restoring Dr. Berham's privileges, he agreed to resign from the Hospital. In addition, the Hospital agreed to submit a carefully negotiated and drafted report to the National Practitioner Data Bank. (A data bank operated by HHS that tracks information about physician malpractice and misconduct.)
Oddly, the Hospital did not just send the Data Bank the agreed report. It also filled in codes in a report that generated language that suggested that Dr. Berham surrendered his privileges while under investigation, was an immediate threat, and had engaged in substandard care.
The Court ruled that by entering these codes, which generated the negative language, the Hospital breached its agreement to submit only the negotiated report. The Court remanded the case to the trial Court, presumably for a trial as to whether the Hospital's breach was material and, if so, a determination as to Dr. Berham's damages.
This cases is interesting to me because the settlement agreement at issue is so similar to the settlement agreement I negotiate every day. In my experience, the parties usually do what they agreed to do. This is especially so when it comes to providing non-economic relief (like sending a report).
