Gaviria v Sapphire Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing of Central Queens, LLC
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
COVID-19-era immunity for healthcare and long-term care facilities under the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act (EDTPA) [Public Health Law former art 30-D, §§ 3080-3082: enacted to broadly protect health care facilities and professionals from liability for acts/omissions in arranging or providing care impacted by the COVID-19 emergency, subject to specified conditions and a gross negligence/recklessness exception].
Granted a CPLR 3211(a)(7) [motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action] dismissing the amended complaint based on EDTPA immunity and finding no adequately pleaded gross negligence.
The order dismissing the amended complaint under CPLR 3211(a)(7).
Although the EDTPA repeal is not retroactive, defendants did not conclusively establish all three statutory prerequisites for EDTPA immunity, and the complaint sufficiently alleged gross negligence; thus dismissal at the pleading stage was improper.
Background
The decedent resided at Sapphire from July 2017 until she died of COVID-19 on April 6, 2020. Plaintiff, individually and as administrator, sued for negligence and gross negligence regarding her care. Defendants moved to dismiss under CPLR 3211(a)(7), invoking EDTPA immunity and arguing the pleadings failed to allege gross negligence.
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Queens County, granted defendants' CPLR 3211(a)(7) motion, holding that EDTPA immunity applied and that the amended complaint did not allege conduct rising to gross negligence.
Appellate Division Reversal
Reversed. The court held that the EDTPA's repeal is not retroactive, but defendants' evidentiary submissions did not conclusively show they satisfied the statute's three immunity conditions, and the amended complaint, taken as true with all favorable inferences, adequately alleged gross negligence. Therefore, dismissal under CPLR 3211(a)(7) was denied and the claims may proceed.
Legal Significance
Clarifies that at the pleading stage, defendants seeking EDTPA immunity must conclusively establish each statutory element to obtain dismissal; otherwise, claims proceed. Confirms the EDTPA repeal is not retroactive. Reiterates that EDTPA immunity does not extend to acts constituting gross negligence or reckless misconduct (except where acts result from resource or staffing shortages as specified in the statute).
Nursing homes and health care providers cannot secure CPLR 3211(a)(7) dismissal based on EDTPA without conclusively proving all statutory predicates; well-pleaded allegations of gross negligence will defeat an EDTPA-based motion to dismiss.