Bonni v. St. Joseph Health System, S244148 (July 29, 2021)
Plaintiff, a physician, sued the defendant hospitals after losing his staff privileges following peer review proceedings allegedly begun in retaliation for plaintiff’s protest against hospital practices. Defendants filed an anti-SLAPP motion to strike plaintiff’s retaliation claim because it arose out of speech and conduct related to the peer review process. The trial court granted the motion. The Court of Appeal reversed on grounds that the anti-SLAPP statute does not protect actions based on a retaliatory motive.
The California Supreme Court reversed in part. The Court clarified that its prior application of the anti-SLAPP statute to hospital peer review proceedings in Kibler v. Northern Inyo County Local Hospital Dist. (2006) 39 Cal.4th 192 extended anti-SLAPP protection only to speech and petition in peer review proceedings and not to decisions or actions arising out of such proceedings. Accordingly, the Supreme Court struck plaintiff’s allegations related to speech and petition but remanded for the Court of Appeal to consider whether the remaining allegations were otherwise barred by the anti-SLAPP statute.
Justice Groban wrote a concurring opinion expressing concern that the result in this case would chill “free participation in official proceedings.”
