ORDERED that the appeal from the order dated December 21, 2000, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as that order was superseded by the order dated February 27, 2001, made upon reargument; and it is further,
ORDERED that the order dated February 27, 2001, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the motion is granted in its entirety, and the order dated December 21, 2000 is vacated.
"The New York State Education Law shields from disclosure `the proceedings [and] the records relating to performance of a medical or quality assurance review function or participation in a medical and dental malpractice prevention program'" (Logue v. Velez, 92 N.Y.2d 13, 16-17, quoting Education Law § 6527; see also Katherine F. v. State of New York, 94 N.Y.2d 200).
Further, Public Health Law § 2805-m confers complete confidentiality on information gathered by hospitals, such as reviews of a physician's competence, expressly exempting it from disclosure under CPLR article 31.
The defendants correctly contend that the Supreme Court erred in refusing to seal documents concerning the defendants' peer review and quality management procedures, as that information is not discoverable. Sealing the record herein ensures that the defendants may objectively analyze the quality of health services without fear of legal reprisals (see Logue v. Velez, supra).
S. MILLER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and COZIER, JJ., concur.