Dr. R. Chad Halversen performed a laparotomy surgery on Tina Archuleta at St. Mark's Hospital, a Utah facility. Less than two days after being discharged from St. Mark's, Archuleta was admitted to a different hospital because of complaints of severe pain and complications from the surgery. Over the course of the next year, physicians performed several corrective surgeries on her. Archuleta later brought suit against Dr. Halversen and St. Mark's. In regard to St. Mark's, Archuleta's complaint asserted that the hospital "failed to seek consult when appropriate, inadequately trained healthcare provider employees, negligently credentialed . . . Dr. Halversen, and generally fell below the standard of care with regard to Plaintiff Tina Archuleta." St. Mark's moved to dismiss the negligent credentialing claim, asserting that Utah does not recognize a cause of action for a supposed failure to use reasonable care when deciding to credential a given physician. The trial court agreed with St. Mark's and dismissed the negligent credentialing claim. Archuleta appealed to the Supreme Court of Utah. Was the trial court correct in concluding that a negligent credentialing claim could not be pursued against the hospital?