Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog
The COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for healthcare providers, including nursing homes and rehabilitation centers. Families who lost loved ones in these settings often sought accountability through medical malpractice or wrongful death claims. Yet New York law temporarily granted broad immunity to healthcare facilities under the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act (EDTPA), shielding them from many civil suits arising from pandemic-related care. While the pandemic has ended, this statutory immunity continues to influence litigation, as demonstrated by a recent New York ruling. If your loved one suffered harm in a healthcare facility, it is important to consult with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to understand the laws that may affect your rights.
Case Setting
It is reported that the plaintiff, acting as proposed administrator of his mother’s estate, commenced an action against a nursing home where the decedent resided before her passing. The plaintiff alleged that the decedent contracted COVID-19 while living at the facility and subsequently died in April 2020. The plaintiff asserted causes of action for negligence, gross negligence, and wrongful death, alleging that the facility failed to protect the decedent from exposure to the virus. The complaint sought damages on behalf of the estate, contending that the nursing home’s care fell below acceptable standards during the pandemic.
Allegedly, the defendant nursing home moved to dismiss the complaint under CPLR 3211(a), arguing that it was immune from liability pursuant to the EDTPA. The statute, enacted in April 2020, provided health care facilities with immunity from civil and criminal liability for harm arising from acts or omissions in the course of providing services during the COVID-19 emergency, so long as certain conditions were met. The defendant asserted that all care provided to the decedent was rendered in compliance with emergency rules, in response to the outbreak, and in good faith. The trial court denied the defendant’s motion, concluding that dismissal was not warranted at the pleading stage. The defendant appealed.
Grounds for Dismissing COVID-19 Related Medical Malpractice Claims
On appeal, the court reiterated that a motion to dismiss under CPLR 3211(a)(7) requires the court to construe the complaint liberally, accept the allegations as true, and determine whether the claims fit within any cognizable legal theory. However, where documentary evidence is submitted that conclusively establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action, dismissal is appropriate.
The court explained that the EDTPA initially provided broad immunity for health care facilities, protecting them from liability if three conditions were met: (1) the services were arranged for or provided pursuant to COVID-19 emergency rules or applicable law; (2) the acts or omissions were impacted by decisions in response to the outbreak and in support of state directives; and (3) the services were provided in good faith. Exceptions existed only for claims of willful or intentional criminal misconduct, gross negligence, reckless misconduct, or intentional infliction of harm.
Here, the court held that the defendant conclusively established entitlement to immunity. The record included the decedent’s medical records, COVID-19 protocols, and affidavits from both an administrator and an attending physician. These materials demonstrated that the facility’s actions were taken in direct response to the pandemic, in accordance with state directives, and in good faith.
The court further found that the plaintiff’s allegations did not rise to the level of willful misconduct or gross negligence necessary to overcome the immunity protections. Even when viewed in the light most favorable to the estate, the allegations suggested, at most, negligence in care, conduct expressly covered by the statute. Because the immunity applied and no exception was triggered, the appellate court reversed the lower court’s ruling and dismissed the complaint insofar as asserted against the nursing home.
Meet with a Skilled Syracuse Medical Malpractice Attorney
When a person suffers harm in a nursing home or hospital, their family members will often understandably seek answers and accountability. Unfortunately, however, statutory protections like the EDTPA may limit liability for healthcare providers during declared emergencies. If you believe your loved one was injured or died as a result of inadequate medical care, the experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers can help you assess your options. Contact us at 833-200-2000 or reach out online to schedule a free and confidential consultation.