Doctors giving false testimony can face sanctions from state.

"EXPERT" physicians beware. Doctors who knowingly' offer false expert testimony on the witness stand can be disciplined by the California Medical Board, although they cannot be sued in civil court for their actions.

That's the opinion of Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who was asked to review the issue this year amid heightened concern in the medical profession over the truthfulness of expert testimony.

The attorney general found that the state's Medical Practice Act allows the board to take action in such cases because it has jurisdiction over any matter involving unprofessional conduct.

That includes "any act involving dishonesty or corruption which is substantially related to qualifications, functions, or duties of a physician and surgeon."

The California Medical Association, a leading doctors' group, is applauding the opinion, which it hopes will encourage the medical board--a state agency--to more aggressively pursue cases of dishonest expert testimony.

"The CMA has long held the position that expert witness testimony should he considered the practice of medicine and should be subject to medical board review," said Susan Penney, a CMA attorney.

In the highest-profile case so far involving untruthful testimony nationwide, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons suspended a neurosurgeon from its membership after accusing him of giving false expert testimony on behalf of a patient--and against a fellow doctor.

The California Medical Board has always contended that it has the authority to discipline physicians who provide false testimony, but such cases are not a high priority compared to cases in which a patient suffers from physical harm at the hands of physicians, said board spokeswoman Candis Cohen.

Lockyer was asked to give the opinion by state Sen. Liz Figueroa, D-Fremont, chairwoman of the Senate's Business and Professions Committee.

Legal Saga

Tenet Healthcare Corp. and non-profit Queenscare have settled one lawsuit, only to find themselves battling each other in Los Angeles Superior Court over a subdivided medical office building they own together.

Earlier this year, the health foundation that serves the poor settled a lengthy dispute it had with Tenet over the building, which is located next to Queen of Angels/Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center, a hospital the Santa Barbara company bought in 1998.

The dispute centered on Tenet's assertion that Queenscare--which owns the top eight floors of the building through a partnership, with Tenet owning the rest--was failing to follow it restrictive covenants dedicating space there to hospital physicians.

That issue was settled earlier this year in mediation, when Queenscare agreed to move its front offices from the building and strictly follow the covenants. But no sooner was that over when Tenet sued Queenscare again.

This time Tenet is asserting that Queenscare has not paid more than $1 million in back utility and maintenance fees on the building. In response, Queenscare countersued Tenet, alleging that it has failed to pay it more than $2 million owed it in state money. (Queenscare was formed when the non-profit hospital was converted to for-profit status with Tenet's purchase.)

Queenscare Chief Executive Terry Bonecutrer said he expects all the legal disagreements to be settled by the end of this year, the date by which Tenet has stated it would like to sell Queen of Angels and other hospitals as part of a restructuring. Until then, he said, "the saga continues."

Staff reporter Laurence Darmiento can be reached al [phone] ext. 237 or at [e-mail].