Attorney Search
Advocacy at a Higher Level

Horvitz & Levy is a solutions-based firm focused on appellate success. We are distinguished by our commitment to responsive service and on-going innovation in the areas of civil appellate litigation, amicus curiae support, and trial strategy consultation.

Our firm history, honors and awards, and locations speak to our collaborative approach and commitment to serving clients as well as the outstanding legal resources we bring to bear.


View Opinion View Opinion

In this closely-watched case, Horvitz & Levy obtained an important victory for its hospital client in the California Supreme Court in a dispute over the procedures hospitals use for reviewing actions adversely affecting physician medical staff privileges.

Dr. Osamah El-Attar challenged the decision of Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center to deny his application for reappointment to the medical staff. The Court of Appeal concluded that the Hospital did not provide Dr. El-Attar with an appropriate hearing because the Hospital itself appointed the hearing officer and the members of the Judicial Review Committee who would conduct the internal review of the denial of Dr. El-Attar’s application. The hospital bylaws at the time required those appointments to instead be made by the hospital medical staff's medical executive committee (MEC).

The Hospital retained Horvitz & Levy to seek review in the California Supreme Court, and to prepare the briefing on the merits when the Supreme Court granted review. The case attracted eight different amicus briefs from various entities supporting both sides of the dispute.

The California Supreme Court reversed. The Court concluded that even if the appointment procedure violated the Hospital’s bylaws, “the violation was not material and, by itself, did not deprive Dr. El-Attar of a fair hearing” because the MEC had in effect delegated to the hospital’s governing board the responsibility to make the complained-of appointments. The court applied the principle that “departures from an organization’s procedural rules will be disregarded unless they produced some injustice.” It also said that “at times the governing body may assume the role normally played by the medical staff in the peer review process without necessarily violating basic norms of fair procedure.”