Robbins v. Ong
Decision Date | 08 June 1978 |
Docket Number | No. CV477-229.,CV477-229. |
Citation | 452 F. Supp. 110 |
Parties | Dr. Frank T. ROBBINS and Robbins Clinic, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. Dr. Antonio ONG, Dr. Cecilia Ong, Dr. Victor Bautista, Dr. Grace Bautista, Dr. Ruben Silan, Dr. Chen Shih, Dr. Wu Jeng, Dr. Humberto Munoz, the Hospital Authority of Liberty County and William J. Verross, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Georgia |
Bobby L. Hill and Jack P. Friday, Jr., Savannah, Ga. (Hill, Jones & Associates, Savannah, Ga.), for plaintiffs.
Walter C. Hartridge, II and John G. Lientz, Savannah, Ga. (Bouhan, Williams & Levy, Savannah, Ga.), J. William Gibson and Herbert P. Schlanger, Atlanta, Ga. (Hansell, Post, Brandon & Dorsey, Atlanta, Ga.), for the Hospital Authority and William J. Verross.
William P. Franklin, Jr., Savannah, Ga. (Oliver, Maner & Gray, Savannah, Ga.), and John T. Woodall, Savannah, Ga. (Kennedy & Sognier, Savannah, Ga.), for defendant doctors.
ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
In this suit plaintiffs claim that the defendants have conspired for three years to deprive the plaintiff, Dr. Robbins, and, as a consequence, Robbins Clinic, Inc., from the medical practice in Liberty County, Georgia. They also allege that the defendant physicians and the Authority have entered into a combination in restraint of trade by not renewing Robbins' hospital privileges. The Chairman of the Hospital Authority is alleged to be a part of the conspiracy.
Dr. Robbins further contends that the Authority denied him due process in the consideration and denial of his application for renewal of his privileges.
Jurisdiction is predicated on 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337, and 1343 for constitutional deprivations and alleged antitrust violations.
This Court entered a temporary restraining order on November 10, 1977, under which the Hospital Authority was restrained from revoking or refusing to renew Dr. Robbins' hospital privileges. An evidentiary hearing on the application for a preliminary injunction was held on December 9 and 10, 1977. The question of whether to grant preliminary injunctive relief is the only issue immediately before this Court.
Dr. Robbins contends that the defendant physicians have conspired against him by refusing to follow established referral policies. He also contends that the doctors and the Hospital Authority have and are conspiring to deny the renewal of privileges.
The evidence indicates that prior to 1974, Dr. Robbins and one or two other physicians were the only medical practitioners in Liberty County. Some time in 1974, what the plaintiff characterizes as "foreign" doctors started practice in Liberty County. Eight of these physicians are defendants in this action.
The record reflects a history of incidents involving Dr. Robbins and the Hospital administration. Three were considered by the Authority at a meeting on September 9, 1976. They involved interruption of a training class, failure to be "readily available" while on emergency room call, and refusal to care for another doctor's patient. The members of the Authority thereafter met and reviewed the recommendation of the Medical Staff that Dr. Robbins' privileges be revoked. Dr. Robbins was represented by counsel at this meeting.
After reviewing the evidence, the Authority sent Dr. Robbins a letter dated November 4, 1976. (Defendants' Ex. 3). It stated:
At a meeting on July 19, 1977, the Authority again discussed Dr. Robbins' status at the Hospital. He was present. The specific item under discussion was Dr. Robbins' refusal to allow a new Registered Nurse, Nina Garcia, to work in the operating room with him. Dr. Robbins explained his view of the incident. After he left the meeting, the Authority considered a recommendation not to renew Dr. Robbins' privileges.
According to the minutes of that meeting (Plaintiffs' Ex. 8), Mr. Verross stepped down as Chairman and recommended that Dr. Robbins' privileges not be renewed. It appears that he had prepared a list of thirteen incidents involving plaintiff. None of them involved medical competence. He had also prepared a written recommendation to the Authority which stated:
After a discussion, the Authority unanimously adopted the recommendation. Chairman Verross sent Dr. Robbins a letter dated July 19, 1977 (Plaintiffs' Ex. 2) which stated that the Authority had "reviewed a twenty-six month record of your offensive and unsatisfactory behavior." It concluded that it was "the considered decision of the Hospital Authority that if you apply for renewal of . . . privileges at Liberty Memorial Hospital, effective December 1, 1977, you will not be granted said privileges."
On October 5, 1977, the Credentials Committee, consisting of two of the defendant doctors, recommended that Dr. Robbins' privileges not be renewed. The reason given was that his "personality and behavior have become incompatible" with the Authority, a majority of the medical and hospital staff, and the hospital management "to the prejudice of good order and efficient functioning of the hospital." (Plaintiffs' Ex. 3).
The medical staff voted to accept this recommendation on October 6th. Authority Tr. 27-33. This suit was filed a few days later.
On October 25th Dr. Robbins was notified of the decision of the medical staff. The letter informed him that a hearing on the decision would be held before the Authority on November 16th at which time he could have counsel present. The letter listed seven incidents which would be reviewed at the hearing. Five of them were included in Mr. Verross' list. Two of the seven incidents occurred after the meeting of the Authority on July 19, 1977.
The hearing before the Authority lasted three days. The transcript thereof is nearly eight hundred pages long.
On December 8th, the Authority issued an opinion. (See Court's Ex. 2). It found that Dr. Robbins had acted improperly in all of the seven incidents set forth in the letter of October 25th. It was specifically found that Dr. Robbins threw a scrub brush outside the operating room and shouted abusively. Second, Dr. Robbins refused to permit Nina Garcia, a qualified hospital employee, to be present while he was in the operating room. Third, he was unwarranted in interrupting a nurses' training session. Fourth, he...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Mahmoodian v. United Hosp. Center, Inc., 19504
...v. University of Puerto Rico, 637 F.Supp. 789, 809 (D.P.R.1986), rev'd on other grounds, 864 F.2d 881 (1st Cir.1988); Robbins v. Ong, 452 F.Supp. 110, 115 (S.D.Ga.1978); Schlein v. Milford Hospital, 423 F.Supp. 541, 544 (D.Conn.1976), aff'd on other grounds, 561 F.2d 427 (2d Cir.1977); Shul......
-
Adkins v. Sarah Bush Lincoln Health Center
...failed to demonstrate any actual prejudice on the part of the medical staff or the Hospital Authority); Robbins v. Ong (S.D.Ga.1978), 452 F.Supp. 110, 116; Kiracofe v. Reid Memorial Hospital (Ind.App.1984), 461 N.E.2d 1134, 1141; Yarnell v. Sisters of St. Francis Health Services, Inc. (Ind.......
-
Cameron v. New Hanover Memorial Hosp., Inc.
...further and held that a candidate's "personal qualities" are reasonably related to the operation of the hospital. See Robbins v. Ong, 452 F.Supp. 110 (S.D.Ga.1978); Schlein v. The Milford Hospital, 423 F.Supp. 541 (D.Conn.1976). In Schlein, the court stated, "A doctor's ability to work well......
-
Kolb v. Northside Hosp.
...privileges was based on issues that "were not primarily medical in terms of specific patient care issues"); see also Robbins v. Ong, 452 F.Supp. 110, 115 (S.D. Ga. 1978) (applying deference where doctor's competence was not at issue, but instead the failure to renew his hospital privileges ......