36-856. Immunity
A. A person is not subject to civil liability, criminal prosecution or administrative proceedings for good faith acts or omissions related to procurement of parts in compliance with this article. All acts and omissions are presumed to be in good faith unless the acts or omissions are done with intent to maliciously cause injury.
B. A person who makes an anatomical gift and the donor's estate are not subject to civil or criminal liability for any injury or damage that results from the making or use of the gift.
C. In determining whether an anatomical gift has been made, amended or revoked pursuant to this article, a person may rely on representations of an individual listed pursuant to section 36-848, subsection A, paragraph 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 relating to the individual's relationship to the donor or prospective donor unless the person knows that the representation is untrue.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
2
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 2020–2021 · leading case:
Tune v. Donor Network (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
Tune v. Donor Network (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 5× “§§ 36-841 through 36-864 (“RUAGA”), which governs OPOs in Arizona, contains a presumption of good faith immunity in § 36-856(A): A person is not subject to civil liability, criminal prosecution or administrative proceedings for good faith acts or omissions related to procurement…”
Greg Shepherd v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (Ariz. 2021).
· cites it 2× “Ramirez considered whether a hospital was entitled to qualified immunity under what is now A.R.S. § 36-856(A), which is part of the Revised Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (“UAGA”).”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 36-856(A) — 2 cases
Tune v. Donor Network (Ariz. Ct. App. 2020).
“§§ 36-841 through 36-864 (“RUAGA”), which governs OPOs in Arizona, contains a presumption of good faith immunity in § 36-856(A): A person is not subject to civil liability, criminal prosecution or administrative proceedings for good faith acts or omissions related to procurement…”
Greg Shepherd v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (Ariz. 2021).
“Ramirez considered whether a hospital was entitled to qualified immunity under what is now A.R.S. § 36-856(A), which is part of the Revised Uniform Anatomical Gift Act (“UAGA”).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.