NY Legislature Approves Measure to Trim Sweeping Grant of Liability Immunity for Nursing Homes, Hospitals
Gov. Andrew Cuomo has said he could "see the rationale" in excluding lawsuit protections for cases not related to the coronavirus.
July 24, 2020 at 12:33 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
New York lawmakers late Thursday voted to roll back portions of a sweeping legal immunity law given to nursing homes and hospitals.
The state Senate and Assembly passed a trim to the broad immunity law, which the Democrat-controlled chambers quietly passed this spring as New York faced the initial wave of coronavirus cases.
Gov. Andrew Cuomo must sign off on the legislation before it becomes law. The Democrat said Wednesday he could "see the rationale" in excluding lawsuit protections for cases not related to the coronavirus. Cuomo hedged the comments by saying he would have to look at the specifics of the bill.
The immunity law, which covered both civil and criminal liability, afforded nursing homes and hospitals broad protections against lawsuits.
Immunity law supporters argue that nursing homes and hospitals needed liability protections as workers faced an unprecedented crisis. Some health care interest groups say rolling back legal protections would undercut facilities' ability to recruit health care workers, especially if another coronavirus surge emerges.
Opponents to the immunity law say seeking justice through the courts is a fundamental principle and they argue the law lets nursing homes and hospitals off the hook for any poor care.
The passage of the new proposal falls short for those immunity opponents, who were pushing for a full repeal of the law.
The law has been shrouded by criticism of political influence on the part of the hospital and nursing home industry. That spotlight focused particularly on the Greater New York Hospital Association, which reported it drafted the immunity clause.
The association, which represents hospitals and health systems, has pumped millions of dollars into political committees in the last several years.
Sponsoring the bill in the state's lower chamber is Assemblyman Ron Kim, D-Queens, who also backed a measure to repeal the entire immunity clause. Kim said the new legislation is a good step in restoring the rights of patients and nursing home residents.
"Moving forward, nursing homes and other health care facilities will be held accountable for failing to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and that is a big win for our families, residents and workers," he said.
Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, D-Westchester, said New York has moved past the initial crisis stage of the coronavirus pandemic and it makes sense to now limit the immunity's scope.
AARP state legislative representative Bill Ferris said the organization supports Cuomo approving the measure, but they "urge him to condition his approval on repeal of nursing home immunity completely and retroactively to the beginning of the pandemic."
There have been at least 6,300 confirmed or presumed coronavirus deaths at nursing homes across New York, according to state data. Long-running issues in the nursing home industry, such as low staffing, have been thrust into the national spotlight due to the pandemic.
The immunity law does not extend to willful criminal misconduct, gross negligence or reckless misconduct, but the law specifies that those definitions do not apply to "decisions resulting from a resource or staffing shortage."
The bill passed Thursday narrows the immunity coverage, specifically by removing protections against non-coronavirus cases. But it keeps the immunity law intact overall.
The legislation specifies that the immunity applies to the "assessment or care" of a person with a suspected or confirmed case of the coronavirus. It also removes "prevention" of the coronavirus from the definition of health care services.
Health care groups have opposed the proposed tweaks to the law.
Bea Grause, president of the Healthcare Association of New York State, said the state should be encouraging volunteers to step up if there's another coronavirus surge in New York, something the bill does not accomplish.
"HANYS is deeply disappointed in the Legislature's change in heart regarding these time-limited liability protections. We are still in the middle of this pandemic," she said.
READ MORE:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHealth Care Giants Sue FTC, Allege Lina Khan Using Loaded Process to Vilify Pharmacy Benefit Managers
3 minute readHospital Succeeds in Denying Vaccine Religious Accommodation Through 'Undue Hardship' Defense
'A Template' for Religious Accommodation: Attorney Gives Insight to $12M Win Over Employer's COVID-19 Vaccination Policies
'Grave Matter of Serious Consequences': Why a Missouri Judge Sanctioned a Top Kirkland & Ellis Attorney
10 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250