O.C.G.A.
O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 51-1-28 (2019)

Transfusions, transplants, and transfers of human blood, tissue, organs; negligence prerequisite to recovery for damages

✓ 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

(a) The injection, transfusion, or other transfer of human whole blood, blood plasma, blood products, or blood derivatives and the transplanting or other transfer of any tissue, bones, or organs into or onto the human body shall not be considered a sale of any commodity, goods, property, or product subject to sale or barter but, instead, shall be considered as the rendition of medical services. No implied warranties of any kind or description shall be applicable thereto and no person, firm, or corporation participating in such services shall be liable for damages unless negligence is proven.

(b) Code Section 51-1-27 shall not be affected by subsection (a) of this Code section.

History

(Code 1933, § 105-1105, enacted by Ga. L. 1971, p. 457, § 1.)

Annotations

Cross references. - Inapplicability of implied warranties to injection, transfusion, or other transfer of blood, blood plasma, etc., or transplanting of tissue, bones, or organs, § 11-2-316.

Law reviews. - For article, ‘‘Federal Automotive Safety Standards and Geor-

gia Products Liability Law: Conflict or Coexistence?,’’ see 26 Ga. St. B. J. 107 (1990). For comment on tort liability of hospitals based on use of defective blood in blood transfusions, see 5 Ga. L. Rev. 371 (1971).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS This section is not contrary to the privileges and immunities clause of U.S. Const., amend. 14. McAllister v. American Nat’l Red Cross, 240 Ga. 246, 240 S.E.2d 247 (1977). Section not special legislation. - The reasoning behind this section is free from the arbitrariness which would render the exemption of blood suppliers special legislation contrary to the Georgia Constitution. McAllister v. American Nat’l Red Cross, 240 Ga. 246, 240 S.E.2d 247 (1977). Clear import of this section is to include not only hospitals, but entities like the American National Red Cross engaged in providing blood for human use. McAllister v. American Nat’l Red Cross, 240 Ga. 246, 240 S.E.2d 247 (1977). Hospitals supplying blood to patients do so as part of rendering medical ‘‘services,’’ rather than as a ‘‘sale’’ of blood, and thus only negligence and not

strict products liability is available to the injured patient. McAllister v. American Nat’l Red Cross, 240 Ga. 246, 240 S.E.2d 247 (1977). O.C.G.A. § 51-1-28 bars claim under O.C.G.A. § 51-1-11 for defective blood. Timms v. Verson Allsteel Press Co., 520 F. Supp. 1147 (N.D. Ga. 1981). AIDS claim against commercial laboratory barred. - Georgia’s ‘‘blood shield’’ statute applied to a commercial laboratory, so as to bar a hemophiliac’s strict liability and breach of warranty claims against the laboratory for a defective blood-clotting agent which allegedly exposed the hemophiliac to the virus associated with acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). Jones v. Miles Labs., Inc., 705 F. Supp. 561 (N.D. Ga. 1987), aff ’d, 887 F.2d 1576 (11th Cir. 1989). Cited in Parr v. Palmyra Park Hosp., 139 Ga. App. 457, 228 S.E.2d 596 (1976).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 63A Am. Jur. 2d, Products Liability, §§ 842, 1189. C.J.S. - 72A C.J.S. Supp., Product Liability, §§ 5, 23, 54. ALR. - Hospital’s liability for exposing patient to extraneous infection or contagion, 96 ALR2d 1205. Tort liability or physician or hospital in connection with organ or tissue transplant procedures, 76 ALR3d 890. Liability of hospital, physician, or other individual medical practitioner for injury or death resulting from blood transfusion, 20 ALR4th 136. Liability of blood supplier or donor for injury or death resulting from blood transfusion, 24 ALR4th 508. Liability for donee’s contraction of Ac-

quired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) from blood transfusion, 64 ALR5th 333. Validity, construction, and application of blood shield statutes, 75 ALR5th 229. Federal preemption of state common-law products liability claims pertaining to medical devices, implants, and other health-related items, 74 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 1. Products liability: pain pumps, 90 A.L.R.6th 75. Liability of manufacturer or distributor for injuries arising from allegedly defective artificial knee devices or prostheses, 89 A.L.R.6th 337. Products liability: hip prostheses, 96 A.L.R.6th 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1987–1993 · leading case: Bradway v. Am. Nat'l Red Cross, 426 S.E.2d 849 (Ga. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bradway v. Am. Nat'l Red Cross, 426 S.E.2d 849 (Ga. 1993). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 51-1-28 provides that the transfusion or other transfer of human blood is to be considered, not a sale of goods, but a rendition of medical services, thus precluding actions sounding in strict products liability.”
Samson v. Greenville Hosp. Sys., 368 S.E.2d 665 (S.C. 1988). “1988); Ga. Code Ann. § 51-1-28 (1982); Haw. Rev.”
Jones v. Miles Labs., Inc., 705 F. Supp. 561 (N.D. Ga. 1987). · cites it 4× “In its current motion, Defendants asserts that Plaintiffs’ first two claims, strict liability and breach of warranty, are barred by Georgia’s “blood shield” statutes, O.C.G.A. §§ 51-1-28 and 11-2-316(5). The former code section exempts transfers of blood, blood derivatives or…”
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.