/_media/adv/web/images/2011/20110321_NDSSI_TB-378x82.gif

Subscriptions

Advertising

Resources

About Us

Contact Us

Create An Account Forgot Your Password?
Trouble logging in or creating an account? click here
Home This Month E-Weekly Newsletter Building a Facility Article Archive Second Opinions
Search:
Benchmarking
General Surgery
Accrediting/Quality
Anesthesia
Code/Bill/Reimburse
Building/Renovating
/_media/adv/web/images/2011/20111003_Ansell_LB-154x100.gif
/_media/adv/web/images/2012/20120426_PDI_LB-154x100.gif
/_media/adv/web/images/2011/20110124_ImageFirst_LB-154x100.gif
/_media/adv/web/images/2012/20120322_Soma_LB-154x100.gif
Outpatient Surgery E-Weekly

Malpractice Verdicts Often Favor Physicians

Physicians come out on the winning end of 80% of malpractice claims that end in jury verdicts, according to researchers at Massachusetts General Hos...

Study: CT Colongraphy Effective in Finding Polyps

A CT-scan-based, laxative-free "virtual colonoscopy" may be as effective as standard colonoscopy in finding potentially cancerous polyps, according ...

Wrong-Site Prevention Video Shows the Right Way

Wrong-site, wrong-patient and wrong-procedure surgery must be prevented at all costs. The 3 steps of the Joint Commission's Universal Protocol make ...

Home > News > October, 2011

Physician Must Pay $181,000 for Defaming Colleague

Lawyer: GI doc should have thought twice before firing off letter that libeled a colleague.

Published: October 19, 2011
Categories: Gastroenterology, Legal/Regulatory, News

Don't put pen to paper in anger. That's the lesson to be learned from the case of a Texas gastroenterologist who must pay a colleague $181,000 in damages for defaming him in a letter. "The lesson is, don't fly off the handle," says Robert W. St. Clair, attorney for plaintiff Easwaran P. Variyam, MD. "Count to 10 before you start writing a letter you may regret."

A Texas appeals court recently upheld the jury's decision in the trial, but the defendant in this case, Joseph E. Hancock, MD, plans to appeal the case to the Texas Supreme Court, according to Donald M. Hunt, one of his attorneys, who wouldn't discuss the case further. Both physicians were gastroenterologists at Texas Tech University School of Medicine in Lubbock, Texas. Mr. St. Clair says defamation lawsuits are rare, and when they are filed, they're usually thrown out on summary judgment or are settled between parties before going to trial, but Dr. Hancock wouldn't accept requests made by Dr. Variyam to retract his letter. "Retracting the letter would have cost him much less than the jury's damage award," says Mr. St. Clair.

Dr. Hancock's letter was in reaction to a letter he received from Dr. Variyam criticizing him for not providing sufficient information when handing off patients while both were on call over the New Year's holiday in 2006. At that time, Dr. Variyam was chief of the university's gastroenterology division and Dr. Hancock's supervisor. In the subsequent letter, sent to the dean of the medical school, Dr. Hancock tendered his resignation and wrote that "it is Dr. Variyam's ethical behavior that should be challenged" in the patient handoff, rather than Dr. Hancock's behavior. Writing that "Dr. Variyam deals in half-truths, which legally is the same as a lie," he copied the letter to 2 other university officials and to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. The ACGME had closed the university's GI fellowship program, which Dr. Variyam headed, the year before, and Dr. Variyam was trying to convince the ACGME to reinstate the program.

Dr. Hancock's letter was "like using a nuclear bomb to kill a gnat," says Mr. St. Clair. "He did not need to go outside the boundaries of the university and contact the ACGME, knowing the position the program was in." After the letter was sent, the ACGME refused to reaccredit the program and Dr. Variyam was removed as GI department chief. Dr. Hancock became the new chief about a year later, before the trial took place, but has subsequently left the post.

Dr. Variyam was "devastated, very distraught and disappointed" about the fallout from the letter, says Mr. St. Clair. He was embarrassed about what colleagues might be thinking of him, he slept fitfully and the incident was continually on his mind. After the trial, Dr. Variyam decided he would resign from Texas Tech and now has a teaching position at the University of Texas Medical Branch across the state in Galveston.

In his lawsuit, Dr. Variyam didn't allege any economic damages from losing his post as chief (since he had retained his faculty position). Instead, he limited his claims to non-economic damages, such as mental anguish and loss of reputation. In the 2009 trial, Dr. Hancock contended that other courts had dismissed slander lawsuits for calling the plaintiff a "liar," but the appeals court noted that cases involving written defamation, such as Dr. Hancock's, are viewed more seriously than off-the-cuff verbal comments.

Mr. St. Clair says defamation claims against an individual are easier to prove than against a media outlet, because the media have the purported purpose of informing the public. In addition to awarding Dr. Variyam $90,000 in actual damages, the jury also awarded him $85,000 in exemplary damages, which meant that all 12 jurors had to conclude that Dr. Hancock committed the libel with "intentional malice," says Mr. St. Clair. The appeals court upheld the exemplary damages, noting that Dr. Hancock had sent his letter to the ACGME with full knowledge that the future of the fellowship program was in the balance. The court also added $6,455.68 in pre-judgment interest to the award.

Leigh Page

© Copyright Herrin Publishing Partners LP 2011. REPRODUCTION OF THIS COPYRIGHTED CONTENT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. We encourage LINKING to this content; view our linking policy here.


Also in the News...

Elderly Woman Severely Injured in Fall Off OR Table

ASC Administrator Stabbed to Death by Estranged Husband

Patient Dies After Admission for Gallbladder Surgery That Wasn't Performed

Orthopod Owes $150,000 for Post-Op Knee Infection

Ophthalmologist Sues His Own ASC for Blocking Plans to Open Competing Center

So-What Study Finds That ASC Owners Perform More Surgery

CMS Updates Emergency Equipment Requirement

© Copyright Herrin Publishing Partners LP 2011. REPRODUCTION OF THIS COPYRIGHTED CONTENT IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. We encourage LINKING to this content; view our linking policy here.

Already have an account? Please sign in:
Email Address:
Password:
PRODUCT & SERVICE RESOURCES
Did You See This?
A showcase of products and services geared to make your facility better.

Architects' Showcase
Is a beautiful, efficient new facility in your future?
/_media/adv/web/images/2011/20111216_USWorldMeds_AR-300x250.jpg
Other Articles That May Interest You
Why Did Bank Stop Lending Money to 2 Indian Doctors Who Own Abortion Clinic?
Physicians claim bank discriminated against them.
Mass. Doctor Charged With Running Percocet Mill
3 patients obtained 58,000 pills over 3 years.
Enlist Your Patients in the Fight Against Healthcare-Associated Infections
Download free, customizable educational materials from APIC.