O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 31-8-101 (2019)

Legislative intent

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The General Assembly finds that persons residing within long-term care facilities are isolated from the community and often lack the means to assert fully their rights as individual citizens. The General Assembly further recognizes the need for these persons to live within the least restrictive environment possible in order to retain their individuality and personal freedom. It is therefore the intent of the General Assembly to preserve the dignity and personal integrity of residents of long-term care facilities through the recognition and declaration of rights safeguarding against encroachments upon each resident’s need for self-determination. It is the further intent of the General Assembly that this article complement and not duplicate or substitute for other survey and inspection programs regarding long-term care facilities.

History

Code 1933, § 88-1903B, enacted by Ga. L. 1981, p. 149, § 1.

Annotations

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 39 Am. Jur. 2d, Health, §§ 1 et seq., 57, 75, 82.

C.J.S. - 39A C.J.S., Health and Environment, §§ 1, 4 et seq., 74 et seq.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1998–1998 · leading case: Atlanta Mkt. Ctr. Mgmt. Co. v. McLane, 503 S.E.2d 278 (Ga. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Atlanta Mkt. Ctr. Mgmt. Co. v. McLane, 503 S.E.2d 278 (Ga. 1998). · cites it 2× “502 (1) ( 498 SE2d 78 ) (1998), where the Court of Appeals held that *610 the corporate owner and operator of nursing homes, while “inextricably bound together” with the residents and an independent health care provider serving the residents, could be liable, in light of the…”

Strahley v. Pruitt Corp., 498 S.E.2d 78 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “” OCGA § 31-8-101. Accordingly, in promulgating the Bill of Rights, it was “the intent of the General Assembly to preserve the dignity and personal integrity of residents of long-term care facilities through the recognition and declaration of rights safeguarding against…”

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.