In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for defamation, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Dunn, J.), dated July 24, 1997, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendants Huntington Hospital, Jay R. Gaudreault, Donald Head, Thomas Hoeft, Michael Quartier, and Arlene Johnson which was for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint insofar as asserted against them, and (2) a judgment of the same court, entered September 24, 1997, as dismissed the amended complaint insofar as asserted against those defendants.
Ordered that the appeal from the order is dismissed, without costs or disbursements; and it is further,
Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof granting that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the amended first cause of action insofar as asserted against the respondents,
The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho,
Pursuant to the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (42 USC § 11101 et seq.) (hereinafter the Act), a hospital is required to make certain reports to the National Practitioner Data Bank (hereinafter the Data Bank) regarding actions affecting a physician’s clinical privileges (see, 42 USC §§ 11133, 11134). In connection with these mandated filings, a hospital is shielded from civil liability with respect to those reports made “without knowledge of the falsity of the information contained in the report” (42 USC § 11137 [c]).
In his first cause of action, the plaintiff, a physician formerly on the staff of Huntington Hospital, asserted two libel claims arising from reports made by the hospital to the Data Bank regarding the circumstances of his resignation from its staff (see, Liberman v Gelstein,
Upon the respondents’ motion for, inter alia, summary judgment, which was based, in part, upon the immunity provided by the Act, the plaintiff had alleged, in opposition thereto, that the contents of a second Data Bank report made by the defendant Hospital contained a false report of the events surrounding his resignation and was knowingly falsely made.
Inasmuch as the respondents failed to refute the plaintiff’s
The remaining causes of action were properly dismissed. Bracken, J. P., Miller, O’Brien and Santucci, JJ., concur.
