Mich. Comp. Laws » Michigan Compiled Laws / Chapter 691 / Act 240 of 2020
Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1475 (2026)

Health care provider or health care facility; immunity for health care services in response to COVID-19 pandemic.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

PANDEMIC HEALTH CARE IMMUNITY ACT


Act 240 of 2020


691.1475 Health care provider or health care facility; immunity for health care services in response to COVID-19 pandemic.

Sec. 5.

    A health care provider or health care facility that provides health care services in support of this state's response to the COVID-19 pandemic is not liable for an injury, including death, sustained by an individual by reason of those services, regardless of how, under what circumstances, or by what cause those injuries are sustained, unless it is established that the provision of the services constituted willful misconduct, gross negligence, intentional and willful criminal misconduct, or intentional infliction of harm by the health care provider or health care facility.

    

    

History: 2020, Act 240, Imd. Eff. Oct. 22, 2020

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 2024–2026 · leading case: Warren Franklin v. McLaren Flint (Mich. Ct. App. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Warren Franklin v. McLaren Flint (Mich. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 31× “BACKGROUND FACTS AND PROCEDURAL POSTURE This case involves a claim of medical malpractice for medical care plaintiff received from defendant’s hospital during the early days of the coronavirus (“COVID-19”) pandemic.”
20241218_C365559_38_365559.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 16× “Accepting the facts stated in plaintiff’s complaint as true, we conclude that defendant is not entitled to immunity under the PREP Act, but MCL 691.1475 is applicable to plaintiff’s claims because her injuries were allegedly sustained while defendant was providing “healthcare…”
20251112_C369349_58_369349.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 16× “Beaumont defendants contended that MCL 691.1475, a section of the Pandemic Health Care Immunity Act (PHCIA), MCL 691.”
Est. of Shirley Jokinen v. Beaumont Hosp. Troy (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 11× “Beaumont requested immunity under § 5 of the PHCIA, MCL 691.1475, which, according to § 7 of the PHCIA, MCL 691.”
20250127_C366510_45_366510.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 6× “Advantage further contended that plaintiff failed to allege facts to demonstrate an exception to immunity under § 5 of the PHCIA, MCL 691.1475. Advantage also contended that it had immunity under the federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), 42 USC…”
Est. of Richard Chandler v. Vhs Sinai-Grace Hosp. Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 3× “Plaintiff argued that this was so because defendants had not demonstrated that their care was “in support of this state’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic,” per MCL 691.1475. Finally, even if the PHCIA applied, plaintiff argued that there was a question of fact on the issue of…”
Kurt Griggs-Swanson v. Beaumont Hosp. Farmington Hills (Mich. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 3× “The trial court dismissed this claim in part on the basis of its determination that the Hospital was entitled to immunity under § 5 of the PHCIA, MCL 691.1475, which provides: A health care provider or health care facility that provides health care services in support of this…”
Robert Monroe v. St Joseph Mercy Hosp. Pontiac (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “116(C)(8), holding that plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and that amendment to his complaint would not be justified.”
20251118_C372742_39_372742.Opn.Pdf (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “[MCL 691.1475]. The immunity granted by this statute applies to services provided “on or after March 29, 2020 and before July 14, 2020.”
Est. of Bernadine Alli v. William Beaumont Hosp. (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “[MCL 691.1475.] The Legislature explicitly made this act retroactive, applying to all claims “on or after March 29, 2020 and before July 14, 2020.”
Est. of Paul Newton v. McLaren Port Huron (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “[MCL 691.1475.] This Court has held that the Legislature’s “clearly-communicated intent” in this statute was to “limit this immunization to services stemming from the pandemic.”
Est. of Paul Newton v. McLaren Port Huron (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “MCL 691.1475 provides: A health care provider or health care facility that provides health care services in support of this state’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic is not liable for an injury, including death, sustained by an individual by reason of those services, regardless…”
Show all 16 citing cases →
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 691.1475(5) — 2 cases
Robert Monroe v. St Joseph Mercy Hosp. Pontiac (Mich. Ct. App. 2025). “116(C)(8), holding that plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and that amendment to his complaint would not be justified.”
Est. of John Edward Rogers v. McLaren MacOmb (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).
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.