Med-Mal Plaintiff Sues for Negligent Credentialing

A Lynchburg Circuit Court says a plaintiff suing for medical malpractice by defendant physician also has stated a claim for negligent credentialing and privileging with allegations that he reasonably relied on defendant’s credentialing process and that such reliance caused him injury; no expert certification is needed for this claim.

Plaintiff’s amended complaint alleges “negligent credentialing and privileging” and medical malpractice. Defendant Centra Health Inc. asserts the complaint should be dismissed on two grounds. First, Centra says to the extent plaintiff seeks to recover against it for negligent credentialing and privileging of defendant physician, plaintiff fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted. Second, Centra moves to dismiss because no statutorily sufficient expert opinion could have been obtained by plaintiff pursuant to Va. Code § 8.01-20.1.

There does not appear to be any Virginia Supreme Court decision which directly addresses causes of action for negligent credentialing and privileging. Plaintiff has cited ample authority from other jurisdictions and Virginia circuit courts which recognize such a cause of action.

Centra has cited case law which also recognizes a cause of action for negligent credentialing and privileging in the corporate context where the plaintiff is a patient of the hospital, and has not provided any case law to the contrary. In Stottlemyer v. Ghramm,, the court held that in order to pursue such a claim, a plaintiff must specifically plead that they reasonably relied on the hospital’s credentialing process and that such a reliance caused them injury.

Here, plaintiff has specifically alleged that he reasonably relied on Centre’s credentialing process and that such reliance caused him injury. The court finds that plaintiff states with sufficient particularity a claim for negligent credentialing and privileging.

A cause of action for negligent credentialing and privileging does not fit within the bounds of the medical malpractice statute, Va. Code § 8.01-20.1. This tort action is not based on “health care” as defined by the Malpractice Act, because the “acts” or “treatments” covered by the Act must be performed or furnished “during the patient’s medical diagnosis, care, treatment or confinement.” The alleged negligent credentialing and privileging acts by Centra would have long preceded this. Likewise this tort action is not based on “professional services,” which is not defined by the Act, outside the nursing home context. Rather, this tort action is based on corporate negligence in the credentialing and privileging process of physicians.

The court holds negligent credentialing and privileging as a separate cause of action does not fall within the scope of the Virginia Medical Malpractice Act and therefore expert certification is not required for this particular part of plaintiff’s claim. Centra’s motion for in camera review and motion to dismiss are overruled. This holding should not be viewed as relieving plaintiff from otherwise complying with the requirement of the Malpractice Act with respect to his remaining claims other than negligent credentialing and privileging.

Martin v. Salvaggio (Burnette) No. CL 15000756-00, Feb. 26, 2016; Lynchburg Cir.Ct.; Les S. Bowers, Robert E. Hawthorne Jr., Elizabeth G. Perrow, C.J. Steuart Thomas III for the parties. VLW 016-8-027, 4 pp.