text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other law, the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, and the Physician Assistant Board shall disclose to an inquiring member of the public information regarding any enforcement actions taken against a licensee, including a former licensee, by the board or by another state or jurisdiction, including all of the following:

(1) Temporary restraining orders issued.

(2) Interim suspension orders issued.

(3) Revocations, suspensions, probations, or limitations on practice ordered by the board, including those made part of a probationary order or stipulated agreement.

(4) Public letters of reprimand issued.

(5) Infractions, citations, or fines imposed.

(b) Notwithstanding any other law, in addition to the information provided in subdivision (a), the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, and the Physician Assistant Board shall disclose to an inquiring member of the public all of the following:

(1) Civil judgments in any amount, whether or not vacated by a settlement after entry of the judgment, that were not reversed on appeal and arbitration awards in any amount of a claim or action for damages for death or personal injury caused by the licensee’s negligence, error, or omission in practice, or by rendering unauthorized professional services.

(2) (A) All settlements in the possession, custody, or control of the board shall be disclosed for a licensee in the low-risk category if there are three or more settlements for that licensee within the last 10 years, except for settlements by a licensee regardless of the amount paid where (i) the settlement is made as a part of the settlement of a class claim, (ii) the licensee paid in settlement of the class claim the same amount as the other licensees in the same class or similarly situated licensees in the same class, and (iii) the settlement was paid in the context of a case where the complaint that alleged class liability on behalf of the licensee also alleged a products liability class action cause of action. All settlements in the possession, custody, or control of the board shall be disclosed for a licensee in the high-risk category if there are four or more settlements for that licensee within the last 10 years except for settlements by a licensee regardless of the amount paid where (i) the settlement is made as a part of the settlement of a class claim, (ii) the licensee paid in settlement of the class claim the same amount as the other licensees in the same class or similarly situated licensees in the same class, and (iii) the settlement was paid in the context of a case where the complaint that alleged class liability on behalf of the licensee also alleged a products liability class action cause of action. Classification of a licensee in either a “high-risk category” or a “low-risk category” depends upon the specialty or subspecialty practiced by the licensee and the designation assigned to that specialty or subspecialty by the Medical Board of California, as described in subdivision (f). For the purposes of this paragraph, “settlement” means a settlement of an action described in paragraph (1) entered into by the licensee on or after January 1, 2003, in an amount of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) or more.

(B) The board shall not disclose the actual dollar amount of a settlement but shall put the number and amount of the settlement in context by doing the following:

(i) Comparing the settlement amount to the experience of other licensees within the same specialty or subspecialty, indicating if it is below average, average, or above average for the most recent 10-year period.

(ii) Reporting the number of years the licensee has been in practice.

(iii) Reporting the total number of licensees in that specialty or subspecialty, the number of those who have entered into a settlement agreement, and the percentage that number represents of the total number of licensees in the specialty or subspecialty.

(3) Current American Board of Medical Specialties certification or board equivalent as certified by the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, or the California Board of Podiatric Medicine.

(4) Approved postgraduate training.

(5) Status of the license of a licensee. By January 1, 2004, the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, and the California Board of Podiatric Medicine shall adopt regulations defining the status of a licensee. The board shall employ this definition when disclosing the status of a licensee pursuant to Section 2027.

(6) Any summaries of hospital disciplinary actions that result in the termination or revocation of a licensee’s staff privileges for medical disciplinary cause or reason, unless a court finds, in a final judgment, that the peer review resulting in the disciplinary action was conducted in bad faith and the licensee notifies the board of that finding. In addition, any exculpatory or explanatory statements submitted by the licentiate electronically pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 805 shall be disclosed. For purposes of this paragraph, “peer review” has the same meaning as defined in Section 805.

(c) Notwithstanding any other law, the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, and the Physician Assistant Board shall disclose to an inquiring member of the public information received regarding felony convictions of a licensee.

(d) The Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, and the Physician Assistant Board may formulate appropriate disclaimers or explanatory statements to be included with any information released, and may by regulation establish categories of information that need not be disclosed to an inquiring member of the public because that information is unreliable or not sufficiently related to the licensee’s professional practice. The Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, and the Physician Assistant Board shall include the following statement when disclosing information concerning a settlement:

“Some studies have shown that there is no significant correlation between malpractice history and a licensee’s competence. At the same time, the State of California believes that consumers should have access to malpractice information. In these profiles, the State of California has given you information about both the malpractice settlement history for the licensee’s specialty and the licensee’s history of settlement payments only if in the last 10 years, the licensee, if in a low-risk specialty, has three or more settlements or the licensee, if in a high-risk specialty, has four or more settlements. The State of California has excluded some class action lawsuits because those cases are commonly related to systems issues such as product liability, rather than questions of individual professional competence and because they are brought on a class basis where the economic incentive for settlement is great. The State of California has placed payment amounts into three statistical categories: below average, average, and above average compared to others in the licensee’s specialty. To make the best health care decisions, you should view this information in perspective. You could miss an opportunity for high-quality care by selecting a licensee based solely on malpractice history.

When considering malpractice data, please keep in mind:

Malpractice histories tend to vary by specialty. Some specialties are more likely than others to be the subject of litigation. This report compares licensees only to the members of their specialty, not to all licensees, in order to make an individual licensee’s history more meaningful.

This report reflects data only for settlements made on or after January 1, 2003. Moreover, it includes information concerning those settlements for a 10-year period only. Therefore, you should know that a licensee may have made settlements in the 10 years immediately preceding January 1, 2003, that are not included in this report. After January 1, 2013, for licensees practicing less than 10 years, the data covers their total years of practice. You should take into account the effective date of settlement disclosure as well as how long the licensee has been in practice when considering malpractice averages.

The incident causing the malpractice claim may have happened years before a payment is finally made. Sometimes, it takes a long time for a malpractice lawsuit to settle. Some licensees work primarily with high-risk patients. These licensees may have malpractice settlement histories that are higher than average because they specialize in cases or patients who are at very high risk for problems.

Settlement of a claim may occur for a variety of reasons that do not necessarily reflect negatively on the professional competence or conduct of the licensee. A payment in settlement of a medical malpractice action or claim should not be construed as creating a presumption that medical malpractice has occurred.

You may wish to discuss information in this report and the general issue of malpractice with the licensee.”

(e) The Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, and the Physician Assistant Board shall, by regulation, develop standard terminology that accurately describes the different types of disciplinary filings and actions to take against a licensee as described in paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, of subdivision (a). In providing the public with information about a licensee via the internet pursuant to Section 2027, the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, and the Physician Assistant Board shall not use the terms “enforcement,” “discipline,” or similar language implying a sanction unless the licensee has been the subject of one of the actions described in paragraphs (1) to (5), inclusive, of subdivision (a).

(f) The Medical Board of California shall adopt regulations no later than July 1, 2003, designating each specialty and subspecialty practice area as either high risk or low risk. In promulgating these regulations, the board shall consult with commercial underwriters of medical malpractice insurance companies, health care systems that self-insure physicians and surgeons, and representatives of the California medical specialty societies. The board shall utilize the carriers’ statewide data to establish the two risk categories and the averages required by subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b). Prior to issuing regulations, the board shall convene public meetings with the medical malpractice carriers, self-insurers, and specialty representatives.

(g) The Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, and the Physician Assistant Board shall provide each licensee, including a former licensee under subdivision (a), with a copy of the text of any proposed public disclosure authorized by this section prior to release of the disclosure to the public. The licensee shall have 10 working days from the date the board provides the copy of the proposed public disclosure to propose corrections of factual inaccuracies. Nothing in this section shall prevent the board from disclosing information to the public prior to the expiration of the 10-day period.

(h) Pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), the specialty or subspecialty information required by this section shall group licensees by specialty board recognized pursuant to paragraph (5) of subdivision (h) of Section 651 unless a different grouping would be more valid and the board, in its statement of reasons for its regulations, explains why the validity of the grouping would be more valid.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2019, Ch. 456, Sec. 1. (SB 786) Effective January 1, 2020.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


kind: section

code: BPC

text:
(a) The district attorney, city attorney, or other prosecuting agency shall notify the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners, the Physician Assistant Board, or other appropriate allied health board, and the clerk of the court in which the charges have been filed, of any filings against a licensee of that board charging a felony immediately upon obtaining information that the defendant is a licensee of the board. The notice shall identify the licensee and describe the crimes charged and the facts alleged. The prosecuting agency shall also notify the clerk of the court in which the action is pending that the defendant is a licensee, and the clerk shall record prominently in the file that the defendant holds a license from one of the boards described above.

(b) The clerk of the court in which a licensee of one of the boards is convicted of a crime shall, within 48 hours after the conviction, transmit a certified copy of the record of conviction to the applicable board.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2012, Ch. 332, Sec. 7. (SB 1236) Effective January 1, 2013.)

division: 2. HEALING ARTS

chapter: 1. General Provisions

article: 11. Professional Reporting

path: 2. HEALING ARTS > 1. General Provisions > 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) The clerk of the court shall transmit any felony preliminary hearing transcript concerning a defendant licensee to the Medical Board of California, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the Physician Assistant Board, or other appropriate allied health board, as applicable, where the total length of the transcript is under 800 pages and shall notify the appropriate board of any proceeding where the transcript exceeds that length.

(b) In any case where a probation report on a licensee is prepared for a court pursuant to Section 1203 of the Penal Code, a copy of that report shall be transmitted by the probation officer to the board.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2012, Ch. 332, Sec. 8. (SB 1236) Effective January 1, 2013.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


citation: BPC § 804

text:
(a) Any agency to whom reports are to be sent under Section 801, 801.1, 802, or 803, may develop a prescribed form for the making of the reports, usage of which it may, but need not, by regulation, require in all cases.

(b) A report required to be made by Sections 801, 801.1, or 802 shall be deemed complete only if it includes the following information: (1) the name and last known business and residential addresses of every plaintiff or claimant involved in the matter, whether or not each plaintiff or claimant recovered anything; (2) the name and last known business and residential addresses of every physician or provider of health care services who was claimed or alleged to have acted improperly, whether or not that person was a named defendant and whether or not any recovery or judgment was had against that person; (3) the name, address, and principal place of business of every insurer providing professional liability insurance as to any person named in (2), and the insured’s policy number; (4) the name of the court in which the action or any part of the action was filed along with the date of filing and docket number of each action; (5) a brief description or summary of the facts upon which each claim, charge or judgment rested including the date of occurrence; (6) the names and last known business and residential addresses of every person who acted as counsel for any party in the litigation or negotiations, along with an identification of the party whom said person represented; (7) the date and amount of final judgment or settlement; and (8) any other information the agency to whom the reports are to be sent may, by regulation, require.

(c) Every person named in the report, who is notified by the board within 60 days of the filing of the report, shall maintain for the period of three years from the filing of the report any records he or she has as to the matter in question and shall make those available upon request to the agency with which the report was filed.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2006, Ch. 223, Sec. 14. Effective January 1, 2007.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
The Legislature recognizes that various types of entities are creating, implementing, and maintaining patient safety and risk management programs that encourage early intervention in order to address known complications and other unanticipated events requiring medical care. The Legislature recognizes that some entities even provide financial assistance to individual patients to help them address these unforeseen health care concerns. It is the intent of the Legislature, however, that such financial assistance not limit a patient’s interaction with, or his or her rights before, the Medical Board of California.

Any entity that provides early intervention, patient safety, or risk management programs to patients, or contracts for those programs for patients, shall not include, as part of any of those programs or contracts, any of the following:

(a) A provision that prohibits a patient or patients from contacting or cooperating with the board.

(b) A provision that prohibits a patient or patients from filing a complaint with the board.

(c) A provision that requires a patient or patients to withdraw a complaint that has been filed with the board.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2009, Ch. 505, Sec. 2. (AB 1070) Effective January 1, 2010.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


citation: BPC § 805

text:
(a) As used in this section, the following terms have the following definitions:

(1) (A) “Peer review” means both of the following:

(i) A process in which a peer review body reviews the basic qualifications, staff privileges, employment, medical outcomes, or professional conduct of licentiates to make recommendations for quality improvement and education, if necessary, in order to do either or both of the following:

(I) Determine whether a licentiate may practice or continue to practice in a health care facility, clinic, or other setting providing medical services, and, if so, to determine the parameters of that practice.

(II) Assess and improve the quality of care rendered in a health care facility, clinic, or other setting providing medical services.

(ii) Any other activities of a peer review body as specified in subparagraph (B).

(B) “Peer review body” includes:

(i) A medical or professional staff of any health care facility or clinic licensed under Division 2 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Health and Safety Code or of a facility certified to participate in the federal Medicare program as an ambulatory surgical center.

(ii) A health care service plan licensed under Chapter 2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code or a disability insurer that contracts with licentiates to provide services at alternative rates of payment pursuant to Section 10133 of the Insurance Code.

(iii) Any medical, psychological, marriage and family therapy, social work, professional clinical counselor, dental, midwifery, or podiatric professional society having as members at least 25 percent of the eligible licentiates in the area in which it functions (which must include at least one county), which is not organized for profit and which has been determined to be exempt from taxes pursuant to Section 23701 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

(iv) A committee organized by any entity consisting of or employing more than 25 licentiates of the same class that functions for the purpose of reviewing the quality of professional care provided by members or employees of that entity.

(2) “Licentiate” means a physician and surgeon, doctor of podiatric medicine, clinical psychologist, marriage and family therapist, clinical social worker, professional clinical counselor, dentist, licensed midwife, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner practicing pursuant to Section 2837.103 or 2837.104. “Licentiate” also includes a person authorized to practice medicine pursuant to Section 2113 or 2168.

(3) “Agency” means the relevant state licensing agency having regulatory jurisdiction over the licentiates listed in paragraph (2).

(4) “Staff privileges” means any arrangement under which a licentiate is allowed to practice in or provide care for patients in a health facility. Those arrangements shall include, but are not limited to, full staff privileges, active staff privileges, limited staff privileges, auxiliary staff privileges, provisional staff privileges, temporary staff privileges, courtesy staff privileges, locum tenens arrangements, and contractual arrangements to provide professional services, including, but not limited to, arrangements to provide outpatient services.

(5) “Denial or termination of staff privileges, membership, or employment” includes failure or refusal to renew a contract or to renew, extend, or reestablish any staff privileges, if the action is based on medical disciplinary cause or reason.

(6) “Medical disciplinary cause or reason” means that aspect of a licentiate’s competence or professional conduct that is reasonably likely to be detrimental to patient safety or to the delivery of patient care.

(7) “805 report” means the written report required under subdivision (b).

(b) The chief of staff of a medical or professional staff or other chief executive officer, medical director, or administrator of any peer review body and the chief executive officer or administrator of any licensed health care facility or clinic shall file an 805 report with the relevant agency within 15 days after the effective date on which any of the following occur as a result of an action of a peer review body:

(1) A licentiate’s application for staff privileges or membership is denied or rejected for a medical disciplinary cause or reason.

(2) A licentiate’s membership, staff privileges, or employment is terminated or revoked for a medical disciplinary cause or reason.

(3) Restrictions are imposed, or voluntarily accepted, on staff privileges, membership, or employment for a cumulative total of 30 days or more for any 12-month period, for a medical disciplinary cause or reason.

(c) If a licentiate takes any action listed in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) after receiving notice of a pending investigation initiated for a medical disciplinary cause or reason or after receiving notice that their application for membership or staff privileges is denied or will be denied for a medical disciplinary cause or reason, the chief of staff of a medical or professional staff or other chief executive officer, medical director, or administrator of any peer review body and the chief executive officer or administrator of any licensed health care facility or clinic where the licentiate is employed or has staff privileges or membership or where the licentiate applied for staff privileges or membership, or sought the renewal thereof, shall file an 805 report with the relevant agency within 15 days after the licentiate takes the action.

(1) Resigns or takes a leave of absence from membership, staff privileges, or employment.

(2) Withdraws or abandons their application for staff privileges or membership.

(3) Withdraws or abandons their request for renewal of staff privileges or membership.

(d) For purposes of filing an 805 report, the signature of at least one of the individuals indicated in subdivision (b) or (c) on the completed form shall constitute compliance with the requirement to file the report.

(e) An 805 report shall also be filed within 15 days following the imposition of summary suspension of staff privileges, membership, or employment, if the summary suspension remains in effect for a period in excess of 14 days.

(f) (1) A copy of the 805 report, and a notice advising the licentiate of their right to submit additional statements or other information, electronically or otherwise, pursuant to Section 800, shall be sent by the peer review body to the licentiate named in the report. The notice shall also advise the licentiate that information submitted electronically will be publicly disclosed to those who request the information.

(2) The information to be reported in an 805 report shall include the name and license number of the licentiate involved, a description of the facts and circumstances of the medical disciplinary cause or reason, and any other relevant information deemed appropriate by the reporter.

(3) A supplemental report shall also be made within 30 days following the date the licentiate is deemed to have satisfied any terms, conditions, or sanctions imposed as disciplinary action by the reporting peer review body. In performing its dissemination functions required by Section 805.5, the agency shall include a copy of a supplemental report, if any, whenever it furnishes a copy of the original 805 report.

(4) If another peer review body is required to file an 805 report, a health care service plan is not required to file a separate report with respect to action attributable to the same medical disciplinary cause or reason. If the Medical Board of California or a licensing agency of another state revokes or suspends, without a stay, the license of a physician and surgeon, a peer review body is not required to file an 805 report when it takes an action as a result of the revocation or suspension. If the California Board of Podiatric Medicine or a licensing agency of another state revokes or suspends, without a stay, the license of a doctor of podiatric medicine, a peer review body is not required to file an 805 report when it takes an action as a result of the revocation or suspension. If the Board of Registered Nursing or a licensing agency of another state revokes or suspends, without a stay, the license of a nurse practitioner, a peer review body is not required to file an 805 report when it takes an action as a result of the revocation or suspension.

(g) The reporting required by this section shall not act as a waiver of confidentiality of medical records and committee reports. The information reported or disclosed shall be kept confidential except as provided in subdivision (c) of Section 800 and Sections 803.1 and 2027, provided that a copy of the report containing the information required by this section may be disclosed as required by Section 805.5 with respect to reports received on or after January 1, 1976.

(h) The Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the Dental Board of California, and the Board of Registered Nursing shall disclose reports as required by Section 805.5.

(i) An 805 report shall be maintained electronically by an agency for dissemination purposes for a period of three years after receipt.

(j) No person shall incur any civil or criminal liability as the result of making any report required by this section.

(k) A willful failure to file an 805 report by any person who is designated or otherwise required by law to file an 805 report is punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) per violation. The fine may be imposed in any civil or administrative action or proceeding brought by or on behalf of any agency having regulatory jurisdiction over the person regarding whom the report was or should have been filed. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file an 805 report is a licensed physician and surgeon, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Medical Board of California. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file an 805 report is a licensed doctor of podiatric medicine, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the California Board of Podiatric Medicine. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file an 805 report is a licensed nurse practitioner, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Board of Registered Nursing. The fine shall be paid to that agency but not expended until appropriated by the Legislature. A violation of this subdivision may constitute unprofessional conduct by the licentiate. A person who is alleged to have violated this subdivision may assert any defense available at law. As used in this subdivision, “willful” means a voluntary and intentional violation of a known legal duty.

(l) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (k), any failure by the administrator of any peer review body, the chief executive officer or administrator of any health care facility, or any person who is designated or otherwise required by law to file an 805 report, shall be punishable by a fine that under no circumstances shall exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) per violation. The fine may be imposed in any civil or administrative action or proceeding brought by or on behalf of any agency having regulatory jurisdiction over the person regarding whom the report was or should have been filed. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file an 805 report is a licensed physician and surgeon, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Medical Board of California. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file an 805 report is a licensed doctor of podiatric medicine, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the California Board of Podiatric Medicine. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file an 805 report is a licensed nurse practitioner, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Board of Registered Nursing. The fine shall be paid to that agency but not expended until appropriated by the Legislature. The amount of the fine imposed, not exceeding fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) per violation, shall be proportional to the severity of the failure to report and shall differ based upon written findings, including whether the failure to file caused harm to a patient or created a risk to patient safety; whether the administrator of any peer review body, the chief executive officer or administrator of any health care facility, or any person who is designated or otherwise required by law to file an 805 report exercised due diligence despite the failure to file or whether they knew or should have known that an 805 report would not be filed; and whether there has been a prior failure to file an 805 report. The amount of the fine imposed may also differ based on whether a health care facility is a small or rural hospital as defined in Section 124840 of the Health and Safety Code.

(m) A health care service plan licensed under Chapter 2.2 (commencing with Section 1340) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code or a disability insurer that negotiates and enters into a contract with licentiates to provide services at alternative rates of payment pursuant to Section 10133 of the Insurance Code, when determining participation with the plan or insurer, shall evaluate, on a case-by-case basis, licentiates who are the subject of an 805 report, and not automatically exclude or deselect these licentiates.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2020, Ch. 265, Sec. 2. (AB 890) Effective January 1, 2021.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) As used in this section, the following terms have the following definitions:

(1) “Agency” has the same meaning as defined in Section 805.

(2) “Formal investigation” means an investigation performed by a peer review body based on an allegation that any of the acts listed in paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, of subdivision (b) occurred.

(3) “Licentiate” has the same meaning as defined in Section 805.

(4) “Peer review body” has the same meaning as defined in Section 805.

(b) The chief of staff of a medical or professional staff or other chief executive officer, medical director, or administrator of any peer review body and the chief executive officer or administrator of any licensed health care facility or clinic shall file a report with the relevant agency within 15 days after a peer review body makes a final decision or recommendation regarding the disciplinary action, as specified in subdivision (b) of Section 805, resulting in a final proposed action to be taken against a licentiate based on the peer review body’s determination, following formal investigation of the licentiate, that any of the acts listed in paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, may have occurred, regardless of whether a hearing is held pursuant to Section 809.2. The licentiate shall receive a notice of the proposed action as set forth in Section 809.1, which shall also include a notice advising the licentiate of the right to submit additional explanatory or exculpatory statements electronically or otherwise.

(1) Incompetence, or gross or repeated deviation from the standard of care involving death or serious bodily injury to one or more patients, to the extent or in such a manner as to be dangerous or injurious to any person or to the public. This paragraph shall not be construed to affect or require the imposition of immediate suspension pursuant to Section 809.5.

(2) The use of, or prescribing for or administering to himself or herself, any controlled substance; or the use of any dangerous drug, as defined in Section 4022, or of alcoholic beverages, to the extent or in such a manner as to be dangerous or injurious to the licentiate, any other person, or the public, or to the extent that such use impairs the ability of the licentiate to practice safely.

(3) Repeated acts of clearly excessive prescribing, furnishing, or administering of controlled substances or repeated acts of prescribing, dispensing, or furnishing of controlled substances without a good faith effort prior examination of the patient and medical reason therefor. However, in no event shall a physician and surgeon prescribing, furnishing, or administering controlled substances for intractable pain, consistent with lawful prescribing, be reported for excessive prescribing and prompt review of the applicability of these provisions shall be made in any complaint that may implicate these provisions.

(4) Sexual misconduct with one or more patients during a course of treatment or an examination.

(c) The relevant agency shall be entitled to inspect and copy the following documents in the record of any formal investigation required to be reported pursuant to subdivision (b):

(1) Any statement of charges.

(2) Any document, medical chart, or exhibit.

(3) Any opinions, findings, or conclusions.

(4) Any certified copy of medical records, as permitted by other applicable law.

(d) The report provided pursuant to subdivision (b) and the information disclosed pursuant to subdivision (c) shall be kept confidential and shall not be subject to discovery, except that the information may be reviewed as provided in subdivision (c) of Section 800 and may be disclosed in any subsequent disciplinary hearing conducted pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).

(e) The report required under this section shall be in addition to any report required under Section 805.

(f) A peer review body shall not be required to make a report pursuant to this section if that body does not make a final decision or recommendation regarding the disciplinary action to be taken against a licentiate based on the body’s determination that any of the acts listed in paragraphs (1) to (4), inclusive, of subdivision (b) may have occurred.

(g) A willful failure to file a report pursuant to this section by any person who is designated or otherwise required by law to file a report is punishable by a fine not to exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) per violation. The fine may be imposed in any civil or administrative action or proceeding brought by or on behalf of any agency having regulatory jurisdiction over the person who filed or should have filed the report. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file a report is a licensed physician and surgeon, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Medical Board of California. The fine shall be paid to that agency. A violation of this subdivision may constitute unprofessional conduct by the licentiate. A person who is alleged to have violated this subdivision may assert any defense available at law. As used in this subdivision, “willful” means a voluntary and intentional violation of a known legal duty.

(h) Except as otherwise provided in subdivision (g), any failure by the administrator of any peer review body, the chief executive officer or administrator of any health care facility, or any person who is designated or otherwise required by law to file a report pursuant to this section, shall be punishable by a fine that under no circumstances shall exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) per violation. The fine may be imposed in any civil or administrative action or proceeding brought by or on behalf of any agency having regulatory jurisdiction over the person who filed or should have filed the report. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file a report is a licensed physician and surgeon, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Medical Board of California. The fine shall be paid to that agency. The amount of the fine imposed, not exceeding fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) per violation, shall be proportional to the severity of the failure to report and shall differ based upon written findings, including (i) whether the failure to file caused harm to a patient or created a risk to patient safety, (ii) whether the administrator of any peer review body, the chief executive officer or administrator of any health care facility, or any person who is designated or otherwise required by law to file a report exercised due diligence despite the failure to file or whether they knew or should have known that a report would not be filed, and (3) whether there has been a prior failure to file a report. The amount of the fine imposed may also differ based on whether a health care facility is a small or rural hospital as defined in Section 124840 of the Health and Safety Code.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 775, Sec. 12. (SB 798) Effective January 1, 2018.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) The Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, and the Dental Board of California shall be entitled to inspect and copy the following documents in the record of any disciplinary proceeding resulting in action that is required to be reported pursuant to Section 805:

(1) Any statement of charges.

(2) Any document, medical chart, or exhibits in evidence.

(3) Any opinion, findings, or conclusions.

(4) Any certified copy of medical records, as permitted by other applicable law.

(b) The information so disclosed shall be kept confidential and not subject to discovery, in accordance with Section 800, except that it may be reviewed, as provided in subdivision (c) of Section 800, and may be disclosed in any subsequent disciplinary hearing conducted pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 775, Sec. 13. (SB 798) Effective January 1, 2018.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) It is the intent of the Legislature to provide for a comprehensive study of the peer review process as it is conducted by peer review bodies defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 805, in order to evaluate the continuing validity of Section 805 and Sections 809 to 809.8, inclusive, and their relevance to the conduct of peer review in California.

(b) The Medical Board of California shall contract with an independent entity to conduct this study that is fair, objective, and free from bias that is directly familiar with the peer review process and does not advocate regularly before the board on peer review matters or on physician and surgeon disciplinary matters.

(c) The study by the independent entity shall include, but not be limited to, the following components:

(1) A comprehensive description of the various steps of and decisionmakers in the peer review process as it is conducted by peer review bodies throughout the state, including the role of other related committees of acute care health facilities and clinics involved in the peer review process.

(2) A survey of peer review cases to determine the incidence of peer review by peer review bodies, and whether they are complying with the reporting requirement in Section 805.

(3) A description and evaluation of the roles and performance of various state agencies, including the State Department of Health Services and occupational licensing agencies that regulate healing arts professionals, in receiving, reviewing, investigating, and disclosing peer review actions, and in sanctioning peer review bodies for failure to comply with Section 805.

(4) An assessment of the cost of peer review to licentiates and the facilities which employ them.

(5) An assessment of the time consumed by the average peer review proceeding, including the hearing provided pursuant to Section 809.2, and a description of any difficulties encountered by either licentiates or facilities in assembling peer review bodies or panels to participate in peer review decisionmaking.

(6) An assessment of the need to amend Section 805 and Sections 809 to 809.8, inclusive, to ensure that they continue to be relevant to the actual conduct of peer review as described in paragraph (1), and to evaluate whether the current reporting requirement is yielding timely and accurate information to aid licensing boards in their responsibility to regulate and discipline healing arts practitioners when necessary, and to assure that peer review bodies function in the best interest of patient care.

(7) Recommendations of additional mechanisms to stimulate the appropriate reporting of peer review actions under Section 805.

(8) Recommendations regarding the Section 809 hearing process to improve its overall effectiveness and efficiency.

(9) An assessment of the role of medical professionals, using professionals who are experts and are actively practicing medicine in this state, to review and investigate for the protection of consumers, allegations of substandard practice or professional misconduct.

(10) An assessment of the process to identify and retain a medical professional with sufficient expertise to review allegations of substandard practice or professional misconduct by a physician and surgeon, if the peer review process is discontinued.

(d) The independent entity shall exercise no authority over the peer review processes of peer review bodies. However, peer review bodies, health care facilities, health care clinics, and health care service plans shall cooperate with the independent entity in providing raw data, information, and case files as requested in a mutually agreeable timeframe.

(e) The case files and other information obtained by the independent entity shall be confidential. The independent entity shall not release the case files or other information it obtains to any individual, agency, or entity, including the board, except as aggregate data, examples, or in the final report submitted to the board and the Legislature, but in no case shall information released under these exemptions be identifiable in any way or associated with, or related to, a specific facility, individual, or peer review body.

(f) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, information obtained by the independent entity from a peer review body or from any other person or entity and information otherwise generated by the independent entity, including, but not limited to, raw data, patient information, case files or records, interviews and records of interviews, proceedings of a peer review body, and analyses or conclusions of the independent entity, shall not be subject to discovery or to a subpoena or a subpoena duces tecum and shall not be admissible as evidence in any court of law in this state. The information described in this subdivision shall be subject to all other confidentiality protections and privileges otherwise provided by law. The independent entity and its employees and contractors shall assert all of the protections for the information described in this subdivision that may apply in order to protect the information from disclosure. However, nothing in this section shall affect provisions of law relating to otherwise admissible material obtainable from sources other than the independent entity.

(g) The independent entity shall report to the peer review body any information it obtains from the peer review body that the independent entity determines should have been reported pursuant to Section 805. The independent entity shall include with the report a clear explanation of the reasons it determined that the information warrants a report under Section 805. If the peer review body agrees with the independent entity’s determination, the peer review body shall report the information pursuant to Section 805 without being subject to penalties under subdivision (k) or (l) of Section 805, if the peer review body makes the report to the board within 30 days of the date the independent entity reported its determination to the peer review body, unless additional time is required to afford due process or fair hearing rights to the subject of the report as required by Section 805 and Sections 809.1 and following.

(h) The independent entity shall work in cooperation with and under the general oversight of the Executive Director of the Medical Board of California and shall submit a written report with its findings and recommendations to the board and the Legislature no later than July 31, 2008.

(i) Completion of the peer review study pursuant to this section shall be among the highest priorities of the Medical Board of California, and the board shall ensure that it is completed no later than July 31, 2008.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2006, Ch. 223, Sec. 17. Effective January 1, 2007.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) Prior to granting or renewing staff privileges for any physician and surgeon, psychologist, podiatrist, dentist, or nurse practitioner, any health facility licensed pursuant to Division 2 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Health and Safety Code, any health care service plan or medical care foundation, the medical staff of the institution, a facility certified to participate in the federal Medicare Program as an ambulatory surgical center, or an outpatient setting accredited pursuant to Section 1248.1 of the Health and Safety Code shall request a report from the Medical Board of California, the Board of Psychology, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, the Dental Board of California, or the Board of Registered Nursing to determine if any report has been made pursuant to Section 805 indicating that the applying physician and surgeon, psychologist, podiatrist, dentist, or nurse practitioner, has been denied staff privileges, been removed from a medical staff, or had their staff privileges restricted as provided in Section 805. The request shall include the name and California license number of the physician and surgeon, psychologist, podiatrist, dentist, or nurse practitioner. Furnishing of a copy of the 805 report shall not cause the 805 report to be a public record.

(b) Upon a request made by, or on behalf of, an institution described in subdivision (a) or its medical staff, the board shall furnish a copy of any report made pursuant to Section 805 as well as any additional exculpatory or explanatory information submitted electronically to the board by the licensee pursuant to subdivision (f) of that section. However, the board shall not send a copy of a report (1) if the denial, removal, or restriction was imposed solely because of the failure to complete medical records, (2) if the board has found the information reported is without merit, (3) if a court finds, in a final judgment, that the peer review, as defined in Section 805, resulting in the report was conducted in bad faith and the licensee who is the subject of the report notifies the board of that finding, or (4) if a period of three years has elapsed since the report was submitted. This three-year period shall be tolled during any period the licentiate has obtained a judicial order precluding disclosure of the report, unless the board is finally and permanently precluded by judicial order from disclosing the report. If a request is received by the board while the board is subject to a judicial order limiting or precluding disclosure, the board shall provide a disclosure to any qualified requesting party as soon as practicable after the judicial order is no longer in force.

If the board fails to advise the institution within 30 working days following its request for a report required by this section, the institution may grant or renew staff privileges for the physician and surgeon, psychologist, podiatrist, dentist, or nurse practitioner.

(c) Any institution described in subdivision (a) or its medical staff that violates subdivision (a) is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a fine of not less than two hundred dollars ($200) nor more than one thousand two hundred dollars ($1,200).

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2020, Ch. 265, Sec. 3. (AB 890) Effective January 1, 2021.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) The Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, and the Dental Board of California shall establish a system of electronic notification that is either initiated by the board or can be accessed by qualified subscribers, and that is designed to achieve early notification to qualified recipients of the existence of new reports that are filed pursuant to Section 805.

(b) The State Department of Health Care Services shall notify the appropriate licensing agency of any reporting violations pursuant to Section 805.

(c) The Department of Managed Health Care shall notify the appropriate licensing agency of any reporting violations pursuant to Section 805.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2017, Ch. 775, Sec. 15. (SB 798) Effective January 1, 2018.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) The Medical Board of California shall work with interested parties in the pursuit and establishment of a pilot program, similar to those proposed by the Citizens Advocacy Center, of early detection of potential quality problems and resolutions through informal educational interventions.

(b) The Medical Board of California shall report to the Legislature its evaluation and findings and shall include recommendations regarding the statewide implementation of this pilot program before April 1, 2004.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2002, Ch. 1012, Sec. 4. Effective September 27, 2002.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) As used in this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings:

(1) “Agency” means the relevant state licensing agency with regulatory jurisdiction over a healing arts licensee listed in paragraph (2).

(2) “Healing arts licensee” or “licensee” means a licensee licensed under Division 2 (commencing with Section 500) or any initiative act referred to in that division. “Healing arts licensee” or “licensee” also includes a person authorized to practice medicine pursuant to Sections 2064.5, 2113, and 2168.

(3) “Health care facility” means a clinic or health facility licensed or exempt from licensure pursuant to Division 2 (commencing with Section 1200) of the Health and Safety Code.

(4) “Other entity” includes, but is not limited to, a postsecondary educational institution as defined in Section 66261.5 of the Education Code.

(5) “Sexual misconduct” means inappropriate contact or communication of a sexual nature.

(b) A health care facility or other entity that makes any arrangement under which a healing arts licensee is allowed to practice or provide care for patients shall file a report of any allegation of sexual abuse or sexual misconduct made against a healing arts licensee by a patient, if the patient or the patient’s representative makes the allegation, in writing, to the agency within 15 days of receiving the written allegation of sexual abuse or sexual misconduct. An arrangement under which a licensee is allowed to practice or provide care for patients includes, but is not limited to, full staff privileges, active staff privileges, limited staff privileges, auxiliary staff privileges, provisional staff privileges, temporary staff privileges, courtesy staff privileges, locum tenens arrangements, and contractual arrangements to provide professional services, including, but not limited to, arrangements to provide outpatient services.

(c) The report provided pursuant to subdivision (b) shall be kept confidential and shall not be subject to discovery, except that the information may be reviewed as provided in subdivision (c) of Section 800 and may be disclosed in any subsequent disciplinary hearing conducted pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).

(d) A willful failure to file the report described in subdivision (b) shall be punishable by a fine, not to exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) per violation, that shall be paid by the health care facility or other entity subject to subdivision (b). The fine may be imposed in any civil or administrative action or proceeding brought by or on behalf of any agency having regulatory jurisdiction over the licensee regarding whom the report was or should have been filed. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file the report under this section is a licensed physician and surgeon, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Medical Board of California. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file the report required under this section is a licensed doctor of podiatric medicine, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Podiatric Medical Board of California. The fine shall be paid to that agency, but not expended until appropriated by the Legislature. A violation of this subdivision may constitute unprofessional conduct by the licensee. A person who is alleged to have violated this subdivision may assert any defense available at law. As used in this subdivision, “willful” means a voluntary and intentional violation of a known legal duty.

(e) Except as provided in subdivision (c), any failure to file the report described in subdivision (b) is punishable by a fine, not to exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) per violation, that shall be paid by the health care facility or other entity subject to subdivision (b). The fine may be imposed in any civil or administrative action or proceeding brought by or on behalf of any agency having regulatory jurisdiction over the person regarding whom the report was or should have been filed. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file the report required under this section is a licensed physician and surgeon, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Medical Board of California. If the person who is designated or otherwise required to file the report required under this section is a licensed doctor of podiatric medicine, the action or proceeding shall be brought by the Podiatric Medical Board of California. The fine shall be paid to that agency, but not expended until appropriated by the Legislature. The amount of the fine imposed, not exceeding fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) per violation, shall be proportional to the severity of the failure to report and shall differ based upon written findings, including whether the failure to file caused harm to a patient or created a risk to patient safety; whether any person who is designated or otherwise required by law to file the report required under this section exercised due diligence despite the failure to file or whether the person knew or should have known that a report required under this section would not be filed; whether there has been a prior failure to file a report required under this section; and whether a report was filed with another state agency or law enforcement. The amount of the fine imposed may also differ based on whether a health care facility is a small or rural hospital, as defined in Section 124840 of the Health and Safety Code.

(f) A person, including an employee or individual contracted or subcontracted to provide health care services, a health care facility, or other entity shall not incur any civil or criminal liability as a result of making a report required by this section.

(g) The agency shall investigate the circumstances underlying a report received pursuant to this section.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2020, Ch. 370, Sec. 4. (SB 1371) Effective January 1, 2021.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) A health facility licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 1250) of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code shall not deny staff privileges to, remove from medical staff, or restrict the staff privileges of a person licensed by a healing arts board in this state on the basis of a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or disciplinary action imposed by another state if that judgment, conviction, or disciplinary action is based solely on the application of another state’s law that interferes with a person’s right to receive sensitive services that would be lawful if provided in this state.

(b) This section does not apply to a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or disciplinary action imposed in another state based upon conduct in another state that would subject a licensee to a similar claim, charge, or action under the laws of this state.

(c) For purposes of this section:

(1) “Healing arts board” means any board, division, or examining committee in the Department of Consumer Affairs that licenses or certifies health professionals.

(2) “Sensitive services” has the same meaning as in Section 56.05 of the Civil Code.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2023, Ch. 258, Sec. 1. (AB 1707) Effective January 1, 2024.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


citation: BPC § 806

text: Each agency in the department receiving reports pursuant to the preceding sections shall prepare a statistical report based upon these records for presentation to the Legislature not later than 30 days after the commencement of each regular session of the Legislature, including by the type of peer review body, and, where applicable, type of health care facility, the number of reports received and a summary of administrative and disciplinary action taken with respect to these reports and any recommendations for corrective legislation if the agency considers legislation to be necessary.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2001, Ch. 614, Sec. 8. Effective January 1, 2002.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


citation: BPC § 807

text: Each agency in the department shall notify every person licensed, certified or holding similar authority issued by it, and the department shall notify every insurance company doing business in this state and every institution mentioned in Section 805 of the provisions of this article.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1975, 2nd Ex. Sess., Ch. 1.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


citation: BPC § 808

text: For purposes of this article, reports affecting respiratory care practitioners required to be filed under Sections 801, 802, and 803 shall be filed with the Respiratory Care Board of California.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 1994, Ch. 1274, Sec. 1.7. Effective January 1, 1995.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text: For purposes of this article, reports affecting psychologists required to be filed under Sections 801, 801.1, 802, 803, 803.5, and 803.6 shall be filed with the Board of Psychology of the Department of Consumer Affairs.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1999, Ch. 655, Sec. 4. Effective January 1, 2000.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


citation: BPC § 809

text:
(a) The Legislature hereby finds and declares the following:

(1) In 1986, Congress enacted the federal Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 11101 et seq.), to encourage physicians and surgeons to engage in effective professional peer review, but giving each state the opportunity to “opt-out” of some of the provisions of the federal act.

(2) Because of deficiencies in the federal act and the possible adverse interpretations by the courts of the federal act, it is preferable for California to “opt-out” of the federal act and design its own peer review system.

(3) Peer review, fairly conducted, is essential to preserving the highest standards of medical practice.

(4) Peer review that is not conducted fairly results in harm to both patients and healing arts practitioners by limiting access to care.

(5) Peer review, fairly conducted, will aid the appropriate state licensing boards in their responsibility to regulate and discipline errant healing arts practitioners.

(6) To protect the health and welfare of the people of California, it is the policy of the State of California to exclude, through the peer review mechanism as provided for by California law, those healing arts practitioners who provide substandard care or who engage in professional misconduct, regardless of the effect of that exclusion on competition.

(7) It is the intent of the Legislature that peer review of professional health care services be done efficiently, on an ongoing basis, and with an emphasis on early detection of potential quality problems and resolutions through informal educational interventions.

(8) Sections 809 to 809.8, inclusive, shall not affect the respective responsibilities of the organized medical staff or the governing body of an acute care hospital with respect to peer review in the acute care hospital setting. It is the intent of the Legislature that written provisions implementing Sections 809 to 809.8, inclusive, in the acute care hospital setting shall be included in medical staff bylaws that shall be adopted by a vote of the members of the organized medical staff and shall be subject to governing body approval, which approval shall not be withheld unreasonably.

(9) (A) The Legislature thus finds and declares that the laws of this state pertaining to the peer review of healing arts practitioners shall apply in lieu of Section 11101 and following of Title 42 of the United States Code, because the laws of this state provide a more careful articulation of the protections for both those undertaking peer review activity and those subject to review, and better integrate public and private systems of peer review. Therefore, California exercises its right to opt out of specified provisions of the federal Health Care Quality Improvement Act relating to professional review actions, pursuant to Section 11111(c)(2)(B) of Title 42 of the United States Code. This election shall not affect the availability of any immunity under California law.

(B) The Legislature further declares that it is not the intent or purpose of Sections 809 to 809.8, inclusive, to opt out of any mandatory national data bank established pursuant to Section 11131 and following of Title 42 of the United States Code.

(b) For the purpose of this section and Sections 809.1 to 809.8, inclusive, “healing arts practitioner” or “licentiate” means a physician and surgeon, podiatrist, clinical psychologist, marriage and family therapist, clinical social worker, professional clinical counselor, or dentist; and “peer review body” means a peer review body as specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 805, and includes any designee of the peer review body.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2011, Ch. 381, Sec. 10. (SB 146) Effective January 1, 2012.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) A licentiate who is the subject of a final proposed action of a peer review body for which a report is required to be filed under Section 805 shall be entitled to written notice as set forth in subdivisions (b) and (c). For the purposes of this section, the “final proposed action” shall be the final decision or recommendation of the peer review body after informal investigatory activity or prehearing meetings, if any.

(b) The peer review body shall give the licentiate written notice of the final proposed action. This notice shall include all the following information:

(1) That an action against the licentiate has been proposed by the peer review body which, if adopted, shall be taken and reported pursuant to Section 805.

(2) The final proposed action.

(3) That the licentiate has the right to request a hearing on the final proposed action.

(4) The time limit, within which to request such a hearing.

(c) If a hearing is requested on a timely basis, the peer review body shall give the licentiate a written notice stating all of the following:

(1) The reasons for the final proposed action taken or recommended, including the acts or omissions with which the licentiate is charged.

(2) The place, time, and date of the hearing.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 336, Sec. 2. Effective September 11, 1989. Operative January 1, 1990, by Sec. 11 of Ch. 336.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
If a licentiate timely requests a hearing concerning a final proposed action for which a report is required to be filed under Section 805, the following shall apply:

(a) The hearing shall be held, as determined by the peer review body, before a trier of fact, which shall be an arbitrator or arbitrators selected by a process mutually acceptable to the licentiate and the peer review body, or before a panel of unbiased individuals who shall gain no direct financial benefit from the outcome, who have not acted as an accuser, investigator, factfinder, or initial decisionmaker in the same matter, and which shall include, where feasible, an individual practicing the same specialty as the licentiate.

(b) If a hearing officer is selected to preside at a hearing held before a panel, the hearing officer shall gain no direct financial benefit from the outcome, shall not act as a prosecuting officer or advocate, and shall not be entitled to vote.

(c) The licentiate shall have the right to a reasonable opportunity to voir dire the panel members and any hearing officer, and the right to challenge the impartiality of any member or hearing officer. Challenges to the impartiality of any member or hearing officer shall be ruled on by the presiding officer, who shall be the hearing officer if one has been selected.

(d) The licentiate shall have the right to inspect and copy at the licentiate’s expense any documentary information relevant to the charges which the peer review body has in its possession or under its control, as soon as practicable after the receipt of the licentiate’s request for a hearing. The peer review body shall have the right to inspect and copy at the peer review body’s expense any documentary information relevant to the charges which the licentiate has in his or her possession or control as soon as practicable after receipt of the peer review body’s request. The failure by either party to provide access to this information at least 30 days before the hearing shall constitute good cause for a continuance. The right to inspect and copy by either party does not extend to confidential information referring solely to individually identifiable licentiates, other than the licentiate under review. The arbitrator or presiding officer shall consider and rule upon any request for access to information, and may impose any safeguards the protection of the peer review process and justice requires.

(e) When ruling upon requests for access to information and determining the relevancy thereof, the arbitrator or presiding officer shall, among other factors, consider the following:

(1) Whether the information sought may be introduced to support or defend the charges.

(2) The exculpatory or inculpatory nature of the information sought, if any.

(3) The burden imposed on the party in possession of the information sought, if access is granted.

(4) Any previous requests for access to information submitted or resisted by the parties to the same proceeding.

(f) At the request of either side, the parties shall exchange lists of witnesses expected to testify and copies of all documents expected to be introduced at the hearing. Failure to disclose the identity of a witness or produce copies of all documents expected to be produced at least 10 days before the commencement of the hearing shall constitute good cause for a continuance.

(g) Continuances shall be granted upon agreement of the parties or by the arbitrator or presiding officer on a showing of good cause.

(h) A hearing under this section shall be commenced within 60 days after receipt of the request for hearing, and the peer review process shall be completed within a reasonable time, after a licentiate receives notice of a final proposed action or an immediate suspension or restriction of clinical privileges, unless the arbitrator or presiding officer issues a written decision finding that the licentiate failed to comply with subdivisions (d) and (e) in a timely manner, or consented to the delay.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 336, Sec. 3. Effective September 11, 1989. Operative January 1, 1990, by Sec. 11 of Ch. 336.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) During a hearing concerning a final proposed action for which reporting is required to be filed under Section 805, both parties shall have all of the following rights:

(1) To be provided with all of the information made available to the trier of fact.

(2) To have a record made of the proceedings, copies of which may be obtained by the licentiate upon payment of any reasonable charges associated with the preparation thereof.

(3) To call, examine, and cross-examine witnesses.

(4) To present and rebut evidence determined by the arbitrator or presiding officer to be relevant.

(5) To submit a written statement at the close of the hearing.

(b) The burden of presenting evidence and proof during the hearing shall be as follows:

(1) The peer review body shall have the initial duty to present evidence which supports the charge or recommended action.

(2) Initial applicants shall bear the burden of persuading the trier of fact by a preponderance of the evidence of their qualifications by producing information which allows for adequate evaluation and resolution of reasonable doubts concerning their current qualifications for staff privileges, membership, or employment. Initial applicants shall not be permitted to introduce information not produced upon request of the peer review body during the application process, unless the initial applicant establishes that the information could not have been produced previously in the exercise of reasonable diligence.

(3) Except as provided above for initial applicants, the peer review body shall bear the burden of persuading the trier of fact by a preponderance of the evidence that the action or recommendation is reasonable and warranted.

(c) The peer review body shall adopt written provisions governing whether a licentiate shall have the option of being represented by an attorney at the licentiate’s expense. No peer review body shall be represented by an attorney if the licentiate is not so represented, except dental professional society peer review bodies may be represented by an attorney provided that the peer review body grants each licentiate the option of being represented by an attorney at the licentiate’s expense, even if the licentiate declines to be represented by an attorney.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 1990, Ch. 332, Sec. 1.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) Upon the completion of a hearing concerning a final proposed action for which a report is required to be filed under Section 805, the licentiate and the peer review body involved have the right to receive all of the following:

(1) A written decision of the trier of fact, including findings of fact and a conclusion articulating the connection between the evidence produced at the hearing and the decision reached.

(2) A written explanation of the procedure for appealing the decision, if any appellate mechanism exists.

(b) If an appellate mechanism is provided, it need not provide for de novo review, but it shall include the following mimimum rights for both parties:

(1) The right to appear and respond.

(2) The right to be represented by an attorney or any other representative designated by the party.

(3) The right to receive the written decision of the appellate body.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 336, Sec. 5. Effective September 11, 1989. Operative January 1, 1990, by Sec. 11 of Ch. 336.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
It is the policy of this state that peer review be performed by licentiates. This policy is subject to the following limitations:

(a) The governing bodies of acute care hospitals have a legitimate function in the peer review process. In all peer review matters, the governing body shall give great weight to the actions of peer review bodies and, in no event, shall act in an arbitrary or capricious manner.

(b) In those instances in which the peer review body’s failure to investigate, or initiate disciplinary action, is contrary to the weight of the evidence, the governing body shall have the authority to direct the peer review body to initiate an investigation or a disciplinary action, but only after consultation with the peer review body. No such action shall be taken in an unreasonable manner.

(c) In the event the peer review body fails to take action in response to a direction from the governing body, the governing body shall have the authority to take action against a licentiate. Such action shall only be taken after written notice to the peer review body and shall fully comply with the procedures and rules applicable to peer review proceedings established by Sections 809.1 to 809.6, inclusive.

(d) A governing body and the medical staff shall act exclusively in the interest of maintaining and enhancing quality patient care.

(e) It is not the intent or purpose of this section to prohibit or discourage public members on state licensing boards and medical quality review committees from participating in disciplinary actions as authorized by law.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 354, Sec. 2. Note: Stats. 1989, Ch. 336, Sec. 1.5, would have added a similar section on Jan. 1, 1990, but that action was effectively nullified by Stats. 1989, Ch. 354, Sec. 3.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) Notwithstanding Sections 809 to 809.4, inclusive, a peer review body may immediately suspend or restrict clinical privileges of a licentiate where the failure to take that action may result in an imminent danger to the health of any individual, provided that the licentiate is subsequently provided with the notice and hearing rights set forth in Sections 809.1 to 809.4, inclusive, or, with respect to organizations specified in Section 809.7, with the rights specified in that section.

(b) When no person authorized by the peer review body is available to summarily suspend or restrict clinical privileges under circumstances specified in subdivision (a), the governing body of an acute care hospital, or its designee, may immediately suspend a licentiate’s clinical privileges if a failure to summarily suspend those privileges is likely to result in an imminent danger to the health of any individual, provided the governing body of the acute care hospital has, before the suspension, made reasonable attempts to contact the peer review body. A suspension by the governing body of an acute care hospital which has not been ratified by the peer review body within two working days, excluding weekends and holidays, after the suspension shall terminate automatically.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 1990, Ch. 332, Sec. 2.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) The parties are bound by any additional notice and hearing provisions contained in any applicable professional society or medical staff bylaws which are not inconsistent with Sections 809.1 to 809.4, inclusive.

(b) The parties are bound by any additional notice and hearing provisions contained in any applicable agreement or contract between the licentiate and peer review body or health care entity which are not inconsistent with Sections 809.1 to 809.4, inclusive.

(c) The provisions of Sections 809.1 to 809.4, inclusive, may not be waived in any instrument specified in subdivision (a) or (b) for a final proposed action for which a report is required to be filed under Section 805.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 336, Sec. 7. Effective September 11, 1989. Operative January 1, 1990, by Sec. 11 of Ch. 336.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text: Sections 809.1 to 809.4, inclusive, shall not apply to peer review proceedings conducted in state or county hospitals, in hospitals owned by, operated by, or licensed to the Regents of the University of California or any of its subsidiary corporations which serve as a primary teaching facility, or in health facilities which serve as the primary teaching facility for medical schools approved pursuant to Section 2084. In addition, Sections 809.1 to 809.4, inclusive, shall not apply to licentiates engaged in postgraduate medical education under the auspices of a medical school approved pursuant to Section 2084. This section shall not affect the obligation to afford due process of law to licentiates involved in peer review proceedings in these hospitals.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 336, Sec. 8. Effective September 11, 1989. Operative January 1, 1990, by Sec. 11 of Ch. 336.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text:
(a) The Legislature hereby finds and declares that the sharing of information between peer review bodies is essential to protect the public health.

(b) Upon receipt of reasonable processing costs, a peer review body shall respond to the request of another peer review body and produce relevant peer review information about a licentiate that was subject to peer review by the responding peer review body for a medical disciplinary cause or reason. The responding peer review body shall determine the manner by which to produce such information and may elect to do so through (1) a written summary of relevant peer review information or (2) a relevant peer review record. Relevant peer review information or peer review record includes, but is not limited to, allegations and findings, explanatory or exculpatory information submitted by the licentiate, any conclusions made, any actions taken, and the reasons for those actions, to the extent not otherwise prohibited by applicable federal or state law. The information shall not identify any person except the licentiate. The information produced by a peer review body pursuant to this section shall be used solely for peer review purposes and shall not be subject to discovery to the extent provided in Sections 1156.1 and 1157 of the Evidence Code and any other applicable provisions of law. All relevant peer review information produced pursuant to this section shall be made available to the licentiate by the requesting peer review body in accordance with Section 809.2.

(c) The responding peer review body acting in good faith is not subject to civil or criminal liability for providing information to the requesting peer review body pursuant to this section. The peer review body responding to the request shall be entitled to all confidentiality protections and privileges provided by law as to the information disclosed pursuant to this section. Prior to the release of any peer review information pursuant to this section, the requesting peer review body shall, upon request, sign a mutually agreeable peer review sharing agreement with the responding peer review body, and shall also indemnify the responding peer review body for any and all claims, demands, liabilities, losses, damages, costs, and expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees, resulting in any manner, directly or indirectly, from the receiving peer review body’s improper release or disclosure of information shared pursuant to this section.

(d) Prior to the release of any peer review information pursuant to this section, the licentiate under review by the peer review body requesting information pursuant to this section shall, upon request, release the responding peer review body, its members, and the health care entity for which the responding peer review body conducts peer reviews, from liability for the disclosure of information in compliance with this section.

(e) The responding peer review body is not obligated to produce the relevant peer review information pursuant to this section unless both of the following conditions are met:

(1) The licentiate provides a release, as described in subdivision (d), that is acceptable to the responding peer review body.

(2) The requesting peer review body signs a mutually agreeable peer review sharing agreement, as described in subdivision (c), with the responding peer review body.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2011, Ch. 380, Sec. 1. (AB 655) Effective January 1, 2012.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text: Nothing in Sections 809 to 809.7, inclusive, shall affect the availability of judicial review under Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure nor the provisions relating to discovery and testimony in Section 1157 of the Evidence Code or Sections 1370 and 1370.1 of the Health and Safety Code.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 336, Sec. 9. Effective September 11, 1989. Operative January 1, 1990, by Sec. 11 of Ch. 336.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


text: In any suit brought to challenge an action taken or a restriction imposed which is required to be reported pursuant to Section 805, the court shall, at the conclusion of the action, award to a substantially prevailing party the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee, if the other party’s conduct in bringing, defending, or litigating the suit was frivolous, unreasonable, without foundation, or in bad faith. For the purposes of this section, a defendant shall not be considered to have substantially prevailed when the plaintiff obtains an award for damages or permanent injunctive or declaratory relief. For the purpose of this section, a plaintiff shall not be considered to have substantially prevailed when the plaintiff does not obtain an award of damages or permanent injunctive or declaratory relief.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 336, Sec. 9.5. Effective September 11, 1989. Operative January 1, 1990, by Sec. 11 of Ch. 336.)

article: 11. Professional Reporting


citation: BPC § 810

text:
(a) It shall constitute unprofessional conduct and grounds for disciplinary action, including suspension or revocation of a license or certificate, for a health care professional to do any of the following in connection with their professional activities:

(1) Knowingly present or cause to be presented any false or fraudulent claim for the payment of a loss under a contract of insurance.

(2) Knowingly prepare, make, or subscribe any writing, with intent to present or use the same, or to allow it to be presented or used in support of any false or fraudulent claim.

(b) It shall constitute cause for revocation or suspension of a license or certificate for a health care professional to engage in any conduct prohibited under Section 1871.4 of the Insurance Code or Section 549 or 550 of the Penal Code.

(c) (1) It shall constitute cause for automatic suspension of a license or certificate issued pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 1600), Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 2000), Chapter 6.6 (commencing with Section 2900), Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 3000), or Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 4000), or pursuant to the Chiropractic Act or the Osteopathic Act, if a licensee or certificate holder has been convicted of any felony involving fraud committed by the licensee or certificate holder in conjunction with providing benefits covered by worker’s compensation insurance, or has been convicted of any felony involving Medi-Cal fraud committed by the licensee or certificate holder in conjunction with the Medi-Cal program, including the Denti-Cal element of the Medi-Cal program, pursuant to Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 14000), or Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 14200), of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. The board shall convene a disciplinary hearing to determine whether or not the license or certificate shall be suspended, revoked, or some other disposition shall be considered, including, but not limited to, revocation with the opportunity to petition for reinstatement, suspension, or other limitations on the license or certificate as the board deems appropriate.

(2) It shall constitute cause for automatic suspension and for revocation of a license or certificate issued pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 1600), Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 2000), Chapter 6.6 (commencing with Section 2900), Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 3000), or Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 4000), or pursuant to the Chiropractic Act or the Osteopathic Act, if a licensee or certificate holder has more than one conviction of any felony arising out of separate prosecutions involving fraud committed by the licensee or certificate holder in conjunction with providing benefits covered by worker’s compensation insurance, or in conjunction with the Medi-Cal program, including the Denti-Cal element of the Medi-Cal program pursuant to Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 14000), or Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 14200), of Part 3 of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. The board shall convene a disciplinary hearing to revoke the license or certificate and an order of revocation shall be issued unless the board finds mitigating circumstances to order some other disposition.

(3) It is the intent of the Legislature that paragraph (2) apply to a licensee or certificate holder who has one or more convictions prior to January 1, 2004, as provided in this subdivision.

(4) Nothing in this subdivision shall preclude a board from suspending or revoking a license or certificate pursuant to any other provision of law.

(5) “Board,” as used in this subdivision, means the Dental Board of California, the Medical Board of California, the California Board of Podiatric Medicine, the Board of Psychology, the California State Board of Optometry, the California State Board of Pharmacy, the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, and the State Board of Chiropractic Examiners.

(6) “More than one conviction,” as used in this subdivision, means that the licensee or certificate holder has one or more convictions prior to January 1, 2004, and at least one conviction on or after that date, or the licensee or certificate holder has two or more convictions on or after January 1, 2004. However, a licensee or certificate holder who has one or more convictions prior to January 1, 2004, but who has no convictions and is currently licensed or holds a certificate after that date, does not have “more than one conviction” for the purposes of this subdivision.

(d) As used in this section, health care professional means any person licensed or certified pursuant to this division, or licensed pursuant to the Osteopathic Initiative Act, or the Chiropractic Initiative Act.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 2021, Ch. 630, Sec. 15. (AB 1534) Effective January 1, 2022.)

article: 12. Insurance Fraud

path: 2. HEALING ARTS > 1. General Provisions > 12. Insurance Fraud


citation: BPC § 820

text: Whenever it appears that any person holding a license, certificate or permit under this division or under any initiative act referred to in this division may be unable to practice his or her profession safely because the licentiate’s ability to practice is impaired due to mental illness, or physical illness affecting competency, the licensing agency may order the licentiate to be examined by one or more physicians and surgeons or psychologists designated by the agency. The report of the examiners shall be made available to the licentiate and may be received as direct evidence in proceedings conducted pursuant to Section 822.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 1989, Ch. 1104, Sec. 1.7.)

path: 2. HEALING ARTS > 1. General Provisions > 12.5. Mental Illness or Physical Illness


citation: BPC § 821

text: The licentiate’s failure to comply with an order issued under Section 820 shall constitute grounds for the suspension or revocation of the licentiate’s certificate or license.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1982, Ch. 1183, Sec. 1.)

article: 12.5. Mental Illness or Physical Illness


citation: BPC § 822

text:
If a licensing agency determines that its licentiate’s ability to practice his or her profession safely is impaired because the licentiate is mentally ill, or physically ill affecting competency, the licensing agency may take action by any one of the following methods:

(a) Revoking the licentiate’s certificate or license.

(b) Suspending the licentiate’s right to practice.

(c) Placing the licentiate on probation.

(d) Taking such other action in relation to the licentiate as the licensing agency in its discretion deems proper.

The licensing agency shall not reinstate a revoked or suspended certificate or license until it has received competent evidence of the absence or control of the condition which caused its action and until it is satisfied that with due regard for the public health and safety the person’s right to practice his or her profession may be safely reinstated.


citation: BPC § 823

text:
Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, reinstatement of a licentiate against whom action has been taken pursuant to Section 822 shall be governed by the procedures in this article. In reinstating a certificate or license which has been revoked or suspended under Section 822, the licensing agency may impose terms and conditions to be complied with by the licentiate after the certificate or license has been reinstated. The authority of the licensing agency to impose terms and conditions includes, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) Requiring the licentiate to obtain additional professional training and to pass an examination upon the completion of the training.

(b) Requiring the licentiate to pass an oral, written, practical, or clinical examination, or any combination thereof to determine his or her present fitness to engage in the practice of his or her profession.

(c) Requiring the licentiate to submit to a complete diagnostic examination by one or more physicians and surgeons or psychologists appointed by the licensing agency. If the licensing agency requires the licentiate to submit to such an examination, the licensing agency shall receive and consider any other report of a complete diagnostic examination given by one or more physicians and surgeons or psychologists of the licentiate’s choice.

(d) Requiring the licentiate to undergo continuing treatment.

(e) Restricting or limiting the extent, scope or type of practice of the licentiate.


citation: BPC § 824

text: The licensing agency may proceed against a licentiate under either Section 820, or 822, or under both sections.


citation: BPC § 825

text: As used in this article with reference to persons holding licenses as physicians and surgeons, “licensing agency” means a panel of the Division of Medical Quality.

history: (History: Amended by Stats. 1993, Ch. 1267, Sec. 9. Effective January 1, 1994.)


citation: BPC § 826

text: The proceedings under Sections 821 and 822 shall be conducted in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 11500) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, and the licensing agency and the licentiate shall have all the rights and powers granted therein.


citation: BPC § 827

text: Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code, relating to public meetings, the licensing agency may convene in closed session to consider any evidence relating to the licentiate’s mental or physical illness obtained pursuant to the proceedings under Section 820. The licensing agency shall only convene in closed session to the extent that it is necessary to protect the privacy of a licentiate.


citation: BPC § 828

text: If the licensing agency determines, pursuant to proceedings conducted under Section 820, that there is insufficient evidence to bring an action against the licentiate pursuant to Section 822, then all licensing agency records of the proceedings, including the order for the examination, investigative reports, if any, and the report of the physicians and surgeons or psychologists, shall be kept confidential and are not subject to discovery or subpoena. If no further proceedings are conducted to determine the licentiates fitness to practice during a period of five years from the date of the determination by the licensing agency of the proceeding pursuant to Section 820, then the licensing agency shall purge and destroy all records pertaining to the proceedings. If new proceedings are instituted during the five-year period against the licentiate by the licensing agency, the records, including the report of the physicians and surgeons or psychologists, may be used in the proceedings and shall be available to the respondent pursuant to the provisions of Section 11507.6 of the Government Code.


citation: BPC § 850

text: No healing arts licensing board or examining committee under the Department of Consumer Affairs shall by regulation require an applicant for licensure or certification to be a member of, to be certified by, to be eligible to be certified or registered by, or otherwise meet the standards of a specified private voluntary association or professional society except as provided for in this article.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 1978, Ch. 1106.)

path: 2. HEALING ARTS > 1. General Provisions > 13. Standards for Licensure or Certification


text:
(a) A healing arts board shall not deny an application for licensure or suspend, revoke, or otherwise impose discipline upon a licensee or health care practitioner subject to this division on the basis of a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or disciplinary action in another state if that judgment, conviction, or disciplinary action is based solely on the application of another state’s law that interferes with a person’s right to receive sensitive services that would be lawful if provided in this state, regardless of the patient’s location.

(b) This section does not apply to a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or disciplinary action imposed in another state based upon conduct in another state that would subject an applicant, licensee, or health care practitioner subject to this division to a similar claim, charge, or action under the laws of this state.

(c) For purposes of this section:

(1) “Healing arts board” means any board, division, or examining committee in the Department of Consumer Affairs that licenses or certifies health professionals.

(2) “Sensitive services” has the same meaning as in Section 56.05 of the Civil Code.

history: (History: Amended (as added by Stats. 2023, Ch. 258, Sec. 2) by Stats. 2024, Ch. 80, Sec. 1. (SB 1525) Effective January 1, 2025. See same-numbered section added by Stats. 2023, Ch. 260.)

article: 13. Standards for Licensure or Certification


text:
(a) For purposes of this section, “healing arts board” means any board, division, or examining committee in the Department of Consumer Affairs that licenses or certifies health professionals.

(b) A healing arts board shall require a licensee or registrant who electronically renews their license or registration to provide to that board the licensee’s or registrant’s individual National Provider Identifier, if they have one.

(c) A violation of this section shall not constitute a crime.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2024, Ch. 369, Sec. 1. (AB 1991) Effective January 1, 2025.)


text:
(a) Notwithstanding any other state law, and consistent with Sections 1 and 1.1 of Article I of the California Constitution, an individual or state or local officer shall not commence a criminal, civil, professional discipline, or licensing action against an individual licensed or certified by a healing arts board concerning the manufacture, transport, distribution, delivery, receipt, acquisition, sale, possession, furnishment, dispensation, repackaging, or storage of brand name or generic mifepristone or any drug used for medication abortion that is lawful under the laws of the state.

(b) A healing arts board shall not suspend a license, revoke a license, or otherwise take disciplinary action against a licensee solely on the basis that the licensee manufactured, transported, distributed, delivered, received, acquired, sold, possessed, furnished, dispensed, repackaged, or stored brand name or generic mifepristone or any drug used for medication abortion that is lawful under the laws of the state.

(c) A healing arts board shall not deny an application for licensure, or suspend a license, revoke a license, or otherwise impose discipline upon a licensee or health care practitioner subject to this division solely because the licensee or practitioner was convicted or disciplined in another state solely for an activity related to brand name or generic mifepristone or any drug used for medication abortion that, if performed in this state, would not be grounds for denial, suspension, revocation, or other discipline.

history: (History: Added by Stats. 2025, Ch. 136, Sec. 4. (AB 260) Effective September 26, 2025.)