Leftenent Governor Delbert Hosemann issued the following statement.
Healthcare facilities which followed applicable public health guidance in good faith in treating patients are now immune from civil liability for COVID-19-related lawsuits, under recently enacted legislation.
Senate Bill 3049, authored by former Senator Sally Doty, also extends protection to first responders, schools or other educational entities, non-profit organizations, and businesses. Businesses which manufactured personal protective equipment in response to the virus are also covered.
“The last thing our hospitals and others, many of whom have employees who have put themselves at great personal risk, need is to be faced with unfounded legal claims,” Lieutenant Governor Delbert Hosemann said. “Right now, we need our healthcare workers, businesses, and communities focused on health and safety, and recovery."
The legislation includes a two-year statute of limitations for any legitimate claim, and backdates to March 14, 2020—the date the Governor’s original emergency declaration was issued.
The provisions do not apply where there is clear and convincing evidence of actual malice or intentional behavior.
To view the legislation or for more information, visit http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.
26 comments:
So this doesn’t apply to normal everyday businesses? Why?
Provides protection to cities and counties, as well. So, school districts can no longer hide behind an unfounded fear of frivolous litigation. School districts should put reasonable measures in place that reasonably and in good faith follow the guidance of the Governor's Executive Orders (which presumably are based on recommendations made, in part, by MSDH). Open the damn schools.
Glad to hear from Governor Hosemann - ooops, thinks he's Governor Hosemann - as he issues this press release about the real Governor signing a bill.
Normal folks would have made their press release when their body (in this case, the Legislature) passed the bill, and when the Governor signed it he would make the press statement.
But Delbert being Delbert just can't stand it - hoping that he can attract a camera in range he has to put out a press release announcing what the Governor did.
Rock on Delbert - you think you are 'tha man'. Enjoy the glory your ego gives you.
I don't understand the need for this. After all, it's just the flu.
This just shows the hypocrisy of the government and business community. On the one hand, it's safe to go back to work, on the other hand, if you are injured or die, no one will be held responsible.
Teachers and retail workers in particular didn't sign up to die for the economy.
@10:12 AM, yes it does. Read the bill, particularly Section 2(f) and Section 3. Immunity applies to any individual, business, organization, or government entity that attempts in good faith to follow public health guidelines.
Unfortunately, the press release is not a very good summary of the bill.
Interested to see what quacks the plaintiffs' bar try to use to state to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that someone caught the virus at a particular location.
Classic conservative double-speak. We don't need regulation because we can count on the free market to sort it out. But tort law, the primary post facto means for people to make businesses pay for the harm they cause, is too burdensome on business. This is literally legislating market failure.
It’s too bad the republicans don’t treat citizens as well as they treat their corporate handlers.
Sorry ambulance chasers you’re out of luck. This needs to be done nationwide but is being held hostage by the democrats.
If you are scared to go out - stay home. If you live or are in contact with people that are vulnerable due to age or poor health- stay home and away from them. It is high time the rest of us to move on. We should not be held hostage by a virus with 99.6% survivability and that is so dangerous you have to be tested to know if you have it.
11:00 am Not really...if you deliberately invade my space and confront me for wearing a mask and turn out to be positive, I'd say that's malice.
And, if an employer sees his employee is coughing or sneezing and doesn't send them home or knows an employee who was working the day before testing is positive and does nothing, has intentionally acted.
Was forced to undergo another Covid test before I was allowed to an emergent cardioversion. When asked why I couldn't refuse was told I would not be treated unless I was tested whether I want to or not. No signature required for the forced test, just done. This, in my opinion, is coercion and malpractice for withholding a procedure based on testing. A medical test may be performed on a patient without consent if there is a court order mandating such a test(none found on request and not given anything in regards to the facility making this decision). Otherwise, a patient with capacity may refuse any routine medical testing. This is making care and treatment undergoing testing for justification of procedure and not for care.
So if you go to a doctor's office and you end up with COVID (from the visit to the office), the doctor can't be sued. The doctor determined that the governor and health orders had not required him to screen himself and his staff for COVID virus so he didn't do it. Even though he had an ethical obligation to do so. You die (or your relative) because the healthcare community was not required (by the governor/health department) to screen themselves. And you cannot get anything for it. Sounds fair.
12:27, I would assume the burden of proof would be on you to prove contracting Covid was directly from the office visit. That is your 1st hurdle. I'm sure you'd also have to prove incompetency and dereliction on the doctor/staff action. This is, I believe, action for the upcoming flood of litigation about to hit not just in our state, but everywhere.
11:38, if you don't want to take the COVID test, then don't and the provider won't give you the treatment you were looking for, your cardiovision.
The game today, nor in years pre-COVID, were set with rules that you get to decide how and when you get treated; there have always been procedures in place that were part of the process - you don't follow them, you don't get into the process.
Sounds like you just want something to bitch about - and can't find anything new.
Now tell us all - what was your reason for not wanting to take another COVID test? Any good reasons, or just being an ass?
It appears we have some readers who were hoping to cash in on the global pandemic. Sorry folks!
There's a reason Mississippi ranks 46 in terms of education. Here's a good indicator.
Thankfully my lawsuit is already finalizing settlement!
Yep. The schools are going wide open, no masks, no social distancing. Complete disregard of the guidelines. Yet, they are now free to kill staff, custodians, vulnerable kids, bus drivers, with impunity. And, they will kill them. Deliberately. To kiss a fool's behind. A fool who will lose us the Senate and White House. Killing folks for arse kissing. Tater, you are a damn pathetic excuse for a human.
Never EVER been a fan of ambulance chasers, but this is beyond a crime. Not even an attempt to follow guidelines.
But since Tater Et Al opened the state clearly without following CDC guidelines on reopening, why can't a judge just consider this theatrics? Tater and Gunn didn't ever TRY to see a 2 week reduction in cases.
To 11:00 and those of like mind: What about all of the financial destruction caused to those who survive C-19, but can't pay the hospital bills afterward? What about those without health insurance, and those who would lose health insurance by the repeal/gutting of the Affordable Care Act? You really can't have it both ways without being full of s**t.
And for those who say extended unemployment benefits encourage people not to work, yet want to immunize businesses and professionals from their own negligence? Aren't we then really encouraging negligence? Again, you can't have it both ways without being . . .
12:55, it sounds as if he/she is concerned about coercion (Coercion is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner by use of threats or force. It involves a set of various types of forceful actions that violate the free will of an individual to induce a desired response), which is illegal and unethical in medical practice. Why he/she didn't want another test is irrelevant. Maybe he is the one waiting on settlement, who knows, but I agree, if he/she was threatened with no care for not taking a test, that should be looked into. May want to read and think a bit more.
The Governor signed it on July 8
History of Actions:
1 06/22 Suspend from Deadlines by HC 69
2 06/22 (S) Referred To Judiciary, Division A
3 06/23 (S) Title Suff Do Pass
4 06/24 (S) Amended
5 06/24 (S) Passed As Amended {Vote}
6 06/25 (S) Transmitted To House
7 06/29 (H) Referred To Rules
8 06/29 (H) Title Suff Do Pass
9 06/30 (H) Tabled Subject To Call
10 06/30 (H) Amended
11 06/30 (H) Passed As Amended {Vote}
12 06/30 (H) Immediate Release
13 07/01 (H) Returned For Concurrence
14 07/01 (S) Concurred in Amend From House {Vote}
15 07/01 (S) Immediate Release
16 07/02 (S) Enrolled Bill Signed
17 07/02 (H) Enrolled Bill Signed
18 07/08 Approved by Governor
It is getting thick on this board with Karens. Somebody shoot that water cannon up here amongst us, we need some relief.
Here's a little gem tucked away in Section 4, providing immunity for incompetent care and misuse of medical products:
The immunity includes, but is not limited to, injury or death resulting from . . . acts or omissions while providing health care services to persons unrelated to the COVID-19 state of emergency when those acts or omissions were intended to support the state's response to the COVID-19 state of emergency, including, but not limited to, the following:
. . .
(b) Diagnosing or treating patients outside the normal scope of the health care professional's license or practice;
(c) Using equipment or supplies outside of the product's normal use for medical practice and the provision of health care services, including using or modifying a medical device for an unapproved use or indication
So, I guess we're good now on the ole Lysol Injection, with a Zyrtec/Pepcid chaser and some hydroxyQuack?
@5:28
Do you prefer a $30,000 per dose vaccine paid for by the US taxpayer?
Watch the infection and death rates rise in nursing homes. The hedge funds that own most long term care facilities now have a free pass to purge the aged with impunity. Politicians that speak of protecting the most vulnerable turn a blind eye when campaign cash is at stake.
King - have any Covid-related lawsuits been filed in Mississippi?
Post a Comment