O.C.G.A.
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.
(a) Any state owned and state operated facility may be designated by the department as an emergency receiving facility. The department shall maintain an emergency receiving facility at each Georgia regional hospital which shall accept, under Code Sections 37-3-41 through 37-3-44, patients found in any county in the service region of the hospital. Any other facility within the State of Georgia may be so designated by the department at the request of or with the consent of the governing officers of the facility. (b) No later than January 15, 2023, any emergency receiving facility designated under this Code section shall report to the department de-identified, aggregated data with the total number of:
(1) Certificates received at the emergency receiving facility by county issued under subsection (a) of Code Section 37-3-41; (2) Such certificates received at the emergency receiving facility by each type of licensed professional authorized under Code Section 37-3-41; (3) Individuals examined in each emergency receiving facility designated or utilized by the department in accordance with subsection (a) of Code Section 37-3-41; and (4) Individuals admitted to each emergency receiving facility designated or utilized by the department following an examination in accordance with subsection (a) of Code Section 37-3-41. (c) The frequency of the reporting requirement required by subsection (b) of this Code section shall be determined by the department no later than December 31, 2021. (d) Failure to submit the information required by subsection (b) of this Code section as directed by the department shall result in the suspension of a facility’s designation as an emergency receiving facility until the required reports are submitted to the department.
History
Code 1933, § 88-504.1, enacted by Ga. L. 1969, p. 505, § 1; Ga. L. 1978, p. 1789, § 1; Ga. L. 2021, p. 686, § 1/HB 591.
The 2021 amendment, effective July 1, 2021, designated the existing provisions of this Code section as subsection (a) and added subsections (b) through (d).
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Cited in Heath v. Peachtree Parkwood Hosp., 200 Ga. App. 118, 407 S.E.2d 406 (1991). OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Medical admissions county is a county in which the procedure is gov-
erned by Ga. L. 1969, p. 505. 1972 Op. Att’y Gen. No. U72-29.
RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - Hospital’s liability as to diagnosis and care of patients brought to emergency ward, 72 A.L.R.2d 396.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases, 1983–2019 · leading case:
Williams v. Smith, 348 S.E.2d 50 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986).
Williams v. Smith, 348 S.E.2d 50 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 8× “Resolution of this issue requires consideration of the general principles applicable to the tort of false imprisonment and the correlation between those principles and the specific statutory provisions of OCGA § 37-3-40 et seq. False imprisonment is an intentional tort, not a…”
Heath v. Peachtree Parkwood Hosp., Inc., 407 S.E.2d 406 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 10× “or pursuant to valid procedural process for her involuntary mental treatment issued by them in compliance with OCGA § 37-3-40 et seq. “Where . . . the detention is not evidenced by some form of objective compliance by the physician with all applicable procedural process…”
Ellison v. Hobbs, 334 F. Supp. 3d 1328 (N.D. Ga. 2018).
· cites it 8× “Ellison also asks the Court to hold that the CCFD Defendants were acting through unlawful means because they took her to the hospital without complying with Georgia's statutory procedures for involuntary mental examinations, see O.”
Harvey v. Harvey, 949 F.2d 1127 (11th Cir. 1992).
“O.C.G.A. § 37-3-40. . Mrs. Harvey claimed the doctors' examinations were insufficient, and thus the certificates leading to her commitment were false.”
Riffe v. Armstrong, 477 S.E.2d 535 (W. Va. 1996).
“Landy, supra, could be construed as establishing a medical negligence standard for determining the "unlawfulness" of an involuntary detention pursuant to OCGA § 37-3-40 et seq., it must be overruled.”
Ridgeview Inst., Inc. v. Handley, 481 S.E.2d 531 (Ga. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “The same analysis is applied to claims for false imprisonment arising from involuntary mental examinations and commitments under OCGA § 37-3-40 et seq. The issue of the “unlawfulness” of a detention is determined “as in any other false imprisonment case by deciding whether the…”
Boatright v. State, 761 S.E.2d 176 (Ga. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “” 12 In Georgia, the governing legal standard for the lawful taking of an individual into custody for the purposes of receiving an involuntary mental-health examination is delineated in OCGA § 37-3-40 et seq. Specifically, OCGA § 37-3-41 requires a peace officer to act pursuant…”
Watkins v. Roche, 560 F. Supp. 416 (S.D. Ga. 1983).
· cites it 2× “Official Code of Georgia § 37-3-40 (Brackets added) Thus, it is evident that Watkins was taken to a facility for an examination operated for that purpose under the authority of the State.”
Harvey v. Harvey, 749 F. Supp. 1118 (M.D. Ga. 1990).
· cites it 9× “Simons Island, Georgia, which had been designated as an emergency receiving and evaluating facility under O.C.G.A. § 37-3-40. When she arrived, she was examined by Dr.”
Copley v. The State., 819 S.E.2d 294 (Ga. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 2× “Lastly, Copley argues that the trial court erred in denying her motion for a directed verdict because police did not comply with OCGA § 37-3-40 et seq. and officers were not acting in their lawful duty.”
Richard Boatright, Jr. v. State (Ga. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “”12 In Georgia, the governing legal standard for the lawful taking of an individual into custody for the purposes of receiving an involuntary mental-health examination is delineated in OCGA § 37-3-40 et seq. Specifically, OCGA § 37-3-41 requires a peace officer to act pursuant…”
Kimberly Annette Ellison v. Kenneth Warren Hobbs (11th Cir. 2019).
“Fourteenth Amendment – Violation of State-Created Procedures Ellison summarily argues that the defendants violated her right to due process when they involuntarily transported her to the hospital without following the prescribed state procedures for involuntary mental evaluation…”
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.