Page:Paulino v. QHG of Springdale, Inc.pdf/4

 Paulinos added a plea for declaratory judgment and damages and sought to revoke Dr. Raben's privileges at NMC.

They subsequently filed two more amended complaints. The final complaint in this case, the fifth amended complaint, asserted claims against NMC, John Doe 1, John Doe 2, and/or John Doe 3. The causes of action asserted were negligence, corporate negligence, negligent credentialing, negligent selection, negligent retention, lack of informed consent, and outrage. All of the negligence counts related to NMC's negligently permitting Dr. Raben to perform surgery on Mrs. Paulino and negligently permitting Richard to monitor that surgery. The Paulinos also requested punitive damages. On July 8, 2010, NMC moved for summary judgment and contended that no cause of action exists against NMC under the Arkansas Medical Malpractice Act or in Arkansas's common law for negligent credentialing or corporate negligence with respect to independent contractors. NMC added in its motion that, were the circuit court to recognize a cause of action for negligent credentialing, NMC would still be entitled to summary judgment based on the immunity granted to it under the Arkansas Peer Review Statute and the federal Healthcare Quality Improvement Act (HQIA) that protects hospitals in connection with credentialing and privileging. NMC further asserted that a third alternative basis for summary judgment was that the Paulinos could not meet their burden of proof because they could not prove two essential elements of a negligence action, which are