Georgia Appeals Court Explores Medical Liens for Unknown Tortfeasors
The appellate court rejected Allstate's contention that Kennestone's failure to ever send Ms. Gentry notice invalidated its lien because Kennestone did not know Ms. Gentry's identity “until well after the time period of OCGA § 44-14-471(a)(1) for providing notice had passed.”
January 09, 2019 at 11:18 AM
6 minute read
This story is reprinted with permission from FC&S Legal, the industry's only comprehensive digital resource designed for insurance coverage law professionals. Visit the website to subscribe.
A Georgia appellate court has issued a decision exploring the requirements for perfecting a medical services lien set out at OCGA § 44-14-471, particularly the requirement of written notice to the alleged tortfeasor and the alleged tortfeasor's insurer.
The Case
On January 20, 2012, Kennestone Hospital, Inc., d/b/a WellStar Kennestone Hospital, mailed its patient, David Pruitt, a notice of its intent to file a lien for the medical treatment and services it had provided to him following a motor vehicle collision. Kennestone filed its lien on February 9, 2012.
Before filing the lien, Kennestone attempted to identify the alleged tortfeasor and her insurer by telephoning Mr. Pruitt and by twice attempting to locate the accident report. It left a voice mail for Mr. Pruitt, which Kennestone said was not returned, and the Georgia Department of Public Safety informed Kennestone that no accident report had been found.
On March 6, 2012, after it had filed the lien, Kennestone was made aware that Mr. Pruitt had hired an attorney to potentially pursue filing a personal injury lawsuit. On that date, as well as on April 27, 2012, Kennestone attempted to contact the attorney but failed to make contact. It again attempted to contact the attorney on June 12, 2012 and September 19, 2012.
Kennestone made further unsuccessful attempts to locate the accident report on March 6, 2012, April 27, 2012, June 12, 2012, June 13, 2012, September 19, 2012, and September 28, 2012.
On December 13, 2012, Kennestone received the accident report, which identified Ginger Gentry and her insurer, Allstate Fire & Casualty Insurance Company.
Kennestone sent a notice of the lien to Allstate on December 20, 2012. It never sent notice to Ms. Gentry.
Thereafter, Kennestone sued Allstate to enforce its lien.
The parties moved for summary judgment. Allstate argued that Kennestone had failed to perfect its lien under OCGA § 44-14-471 because it had not sent notice of the lien to Ms. Gentry.
For its part, Kennestone countered that during the time period for providing notice, it had not identified the alleged tortfeasor, despite exercising due diligence, so it had nowhere to send the notice. It also argued that the statute did not require notice to the tortfeasor after the lien had been filed.
The trial court granted summary judgment to Kennestone on its claims.
Allstate appealed.
Georgia Law
OCGA § 44-14-471(a) provides that to perfect a lien for the provision of medical services, a hospital:
(1) Shall, not less than 15 days prior to the date of filing the statement required under paragraph (2) of this subsection, provide written notice to the patient and, to the best of the claimant's knowledge, the persons . . . and their insurers claimed by the injured person or the legal representative of the injured person to be liable for damages arising from the injuries . . . ; and
(2) Shall file in the office of the clerk of the superior court of the county in which the hospital . . . is located and in the county wherein the patient resides, if a resident of this state, a verified statement setting forth the name and address of the patient as it appears on the records of the hospital . . . ; the name and location of the hospital . . . ; the dates of admission and discharge of the patient therefrom . . . ; and the amount claimed to be due for the hospital.
The Appellate Court's Decision
The appellate court affirmed.
In its decision, the appellate court explained that hospitals must file the statements described in Section 44-14-471(a)(2) within 75 days after the patient is discharged from the hospital. The appellate court added that because the written notice of Section 44-14-471(a)(1) must be provided not less than 15 days before the verified statement of Section 44-14-471(a)(2) is filed, and the verified statement of Section 44-14-471(a)(2) must be filed within 75 days of a patient's discharge, then the written notice of Section 44-14-471(a)(1) must be provided within 60 days after a patient's discharge.
In this case, the appellate court reasoned, Kennestone timely filed its lien on February 9, 2012, so it had to provide notice to Mr. Pruitt and, “to the best of [its] knowledge,” to the alleged tortfeasor and her insurer not less than 15 days before then, which was on or before January 25, 2012.
The appellate court pointed out that Kennestone sent that notice to Mr. Pruitt on January 20, 2012.
It also observed that there was no evidence that Kennestone knew the alleged tortfeasor's or her insurer's identity on or before January 25, 2012, in spite of exercising due diligence. Accordingly, the appellate court ruled, the record supported the trial court's conclusion that “[b]ecause Kennestone put forth a diligent effort in obtaining the requisite identities, Kennestone met OCGA § 44-14-471(a)(1)'[s] 'best of knowledge' standard in providing notice to all required parties and therefore properly noticed all required parties.”
The appellate court rejected Allstate's contention that Kennestone's failure to ever send Ms. Gentry notice invalidated its lien because Kennestone did not know Ms. Gentry's identity “until well after the time period of OCGA § 44-14-471(a)(1) for providing notice had passed.”
Moreover, the appellate court added, the statute did not require that once Kennestone learned Ms. Gentry's identity, it was obligated to send notice even though the notice period had passed and the lien had been filed.
The case is Allstate Fire & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Kennestone Hospital, Inc., No. A18A1822 (Ga. Ct. App. Jan. 3, 2019).
Steven A. Meyerowitz is the director of FC&S Legal, editor-in-chief of the Insurance Coverage Law Report and founder and president of Meyerowitz Communications Inc.
|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 AllUpcoming Changes to Medicare Secondary Payer Reporting: What WC Insurers and Attorneys Need to Know
5 minute readBiden Administration Tells Justices That Bans on Gender Care Are Sex Discrimination
11th Circuit Allows Florida Transgender Health Care Ban to Continue Pending Full Appeal on Constitutionality of Law
Trending Stories
- 1Trump's SEC Overhaul: What It Means For Big Law Capital Markets, Crypto Work
- 2Armstrong Teasdale's London Creditors Face Big Losses
- 3Texas Court Invalidates SEC’s Dealer Rule, Siding with Crypto Advocates
- 4Quinn Emanuel Has Thrived in China. Will Trump Help Boost Its Fortunes?
- 5Manufacturer Must Provide Details Surrounding Expert’s Livestreamed Inspection, Fed Court Rules
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