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

O.C.G.A. § 51-1-29.1 (2019)

Liability of voluntary health care provider and sponsoring organization

✓ 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) Without waiving or affecting and cumulative of any existing immunity from any source, unless it is established that injuries or death were caused by gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct: (1) No health care provider licensed under Chapter 9, 11, 26, 30, 33, or 34 of Title 43 who voluntarily and without the expectation or receipt of compensation provides professional services, within the

scope of such health care provider’s licensure, for and at the request of a hospital, public school, nonprofit organization, or an agency of the state or one of its political subdivisions or provides such professional services to a person at the request of such an organization, which organization does not expect or receive compensation with respect to such services from the recipient of such services; or (2) No licensed hospital, public school, or nonprofit organization which requests, sponsors, or participates in the providing of the services under the circumstances provided in paragraph (1) of this subsection shall be liable for damages or injuries alleged to have been sustained by the person nor for damages for the injury or death of the person when the injuries or death are alleged to have occurred by reason of an act or omission in the rendering of such services. (b) Nothing in this Code section shall be construed to change the scope of practice of any health care provider granted immunity in this Code section. (c) This Code section shall apply only to causes of action arising on or after July 1, 1987.

History

(Code 1981, § 51-1-29.1, enacted by Ga. L. 1987, p. 887, § 4; Ga. L. 1987, p. 986, § 2; Ga. L. 1998, p. 859, § 1; Ga. L. 1999, p. 81, § 51; Ga. L. 2007, p. 47, § 51/SB 103.)

Annotations

Code Commission notes. - The enactment of this Code section by Ga. L. 1987, p. 887, § 4, irreconcilably conflicted with and was treated as superseded by

Ga. L. 1987, p. 986, § 2. See County of Butts v. Strahan, 151 Ga. 417 (1921). Law reviews. - For article, ‘‘Torts,’’ see 53 Mercer L. Rev. 441 (2001).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Prima facie case of immunity under O.C.G.A. § 51-1-29.1 was established by a physician’s affidavit that neither the physician’s nor the physician’s professional corporation expected or received any public or private source payment for the physician’s on-call services. Washington v. Clark, 250 Ga. App. 242, 550 S.E.2d 671 (2001). In a medical malpractice action, as affidavits from a decedent’s mother and girlfriend created a fact issue regarding a doctor’s expectation of payment which required resolution by a jury, the trial court erred in granting the doctor’s summary judgment motion pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 51-1-29.1. Travick v. Lee, 278 Ga. App. 823, 630 S.E.2d 99 (2006). Summary judgment in favor of a doctor and a clinic for the post-op treatment of a

patient was upheld on appeal, as: (1) both remained immune from suit under O.C.G.A. § 51-1-29.1; (2) the doctor’s treatment of the decedent’s complications immediately following the decedent’s surgery did not change the voluntary nature of the treatment as a whole; (3) it was reasonable to expect that a physician would continue to treat a patient following surgery; and (4) the appeals court viewed the doctor’s voluntary treatment of the decedent as a whole, not divided into categories of preoperative, operative, and post-operative; moreover, because no evidence was presented that either the doctor or the clinic was a ‘‘charitable institution,’’ and O.C.G.A. § 51-1-29.1 provided no such exception, waiver of any common-law charitable immunity through the doctor’s procurement of liabil-

ity insurance did not apply. Wells v. Rogers, 281 Ga. App. 473, 636 S.E.2d 171 (2006), cert. denied, 2007 Ga. LEXIS 101 (Ga. 2007). Cited in Walker v. Fulton-DeKalb

Hosp. Auth., 200 Ga. App. 750, 409 S.E.2d 529 (1991); Porquez v. Washington, 268 Ga. 649, 492 S.E.2d 665 (1997); Washington v. Georgia Baptist Medical Ctr., 230 Ga. App. 654, 501 S.E.2d 1 (1998).

RESEARCH REFERENCES C.J.S. - 65 C.J.S., Negligence, § 40. 65A C.J.S., Negligence, § 342.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1989–2010 · leading case: Porquez v. Washington, 492 S.E.2d 665 (Ga. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Porquez v. Washington, 492 S.E.2d 665 (Ga. 1997). · cites it 4× “Clark also asserted immunity from liability as a voluntary health care provider under OCGA § 51-1-29.1. The day before the hearing on the doctors’ motions, Washington filed an amendment to his expert affidavit.”
Porquez v. Washington, 492 S.E.2d 665 (Ga. 1997). · cites it 4× “Clark also asserted immunity from liability as a voluntary health care provider under OCGA § 51-1-29.1. The day before the hearing on the doctors' motions, Washington filed an amendment to his expert affidavit.”
Fulton-DeKalb Hosp. Auth. v. Walker, 456 S.E.2d 97 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 4× “See OCGA § 51-1-29.1. In short, it appears that the trial court's initial grant of summary judgment and our holdings in Walker I were all based on an incorrect set of facts provided by the Authority—that the Ponder plan was still the only plan in effect.”
Washington v. Clark, 550 S.E.2d 671 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 12× “Clark was warranted by the statutory immunity afforded a voluntary health care provider under OCGA § 51-1-29.1. 2 On remand, this Court adhered to its reversal of summary judgment, ruling that Dr.”
Travick v. Lee, 630 S.E.2d 99 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 8× “This is an appeal from a grant of summary judgment under OCGA § 51-1-29.1, the immunity statute for voluntary health care providers.”
Hous. Auth. of Savannah v. Greene, 383 S.E.2d 867 (Ga. 1989). · cites it 2× “Section 4 enacts a new Code section, OCGA § 51-1-29.1, generally providing that where professional healthcare services are provided on a gratuitous basis, no licensed health-care provider, licensed hospital, public school, nonprofit organization, or state agency shall be liable…”
Nelson v. Bd. of Regents of the Univ. Sys. of Georgia, 704 S.E.2d 868 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “33 The trial court also granted the Resident Defendants’ motion to dismiss based upon immunity provided to voluntary health care providers, OCGA § 51-1-29.1 (a), and to medical students, OCGA § 51-1-38 (a).”
Fulton-DeKalb Hosp. Auth. v. Fanning, 396 S.E.2d 534 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 4× “Where a non-paying patient, who in the end was the recipient of the hospital's charity, claims he was able to pay and was not a charity patient so that the hospital is contractually bound to him and therefore subject to a negligence claim, he or his personal representative…”
Walker v. Fulton-dekalb Hosp. Auth., 409 S.E.2d 529 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “Appellee is also granted immunity under OCGA § 51-1-29.1, which provides: “(a) Without waiving or affecting and cumulative of any existing immunity from any source, unless it is established that injuries or death were caused by gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct:…”
Spence v. United States, 132 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (M.D. Ga. 2001). · cites it 2× “O.C.G.A. § 51-1-29.1 (2000). Because there is no evidence that Dr.”
Washington v. Georgia Baptist Med. Ctr., 501 S.E.2d 1 (Ga. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 4× “shall be liable for damages or injuries alleged to have been sustained by the person nor for damages for the injury or death of the person when the injuries or death are alleged to have occurred by reason of an act or omission in the rendering of services.”
Wells v. Rogers, 636 S.E.2d 171 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 8× “This is an appeal from a grant of partial summary judgment under OCGA § 51-1-29.1, the immunity statute for voluntary health care providers.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
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.