(1) Any health care provider who fails to qualify under the Nebraska Hospital-Medical Liability Act shall not be covered by the provisions of such act and shall be subject to liability under doctrines of common law. If a health care provider shall not so qualify, the patient's remedy shall not be affected by the terms and provisions of the act.
(2) If a health care provider shall qualify under the act, the patient's exclusive remedy against the health care provider or his or her partner, limited liability company member, employer, or employees for alleged malpractice, professional negligence, failure to provide care, breach of contract relating to providing medical care, or other claim based upon failure to obtain informed consent for an operation or treatment shall be as provided by the act unless the patient shall have elected not to come under the provisions of the act. Unless the patient or his or her representative shall have (a) elected not to be bound by the terms of the act, (b) filed such election with the director in advance of any treatment, act, or omission upon which any claim or cause of action is based, and (c) notified the health care provider of election as soon as is reasonable under the circumstances that such patient has so elected, it shall be conclusively presumed that the patient has elected to be bound by the terms and provisions of the act. Such election may be made by either legal parent for an unborn or newborn child. Unless a legal parent of an unborn child or the guardian or other representative of a minor or incompetent makes the election in the manner provided in the act for such unborn person, minor, or incompetent, such person shall be deemed to be subject to the terms and provisions of the act.
(3) An election of a patient not to be bound by the act shall be effective for a period of two years after filing unless such election is withdrawn by the patient and shall be ineffective after such two-year period unless renewed in writing and filed with the director. The patient or his or her representative may revoke the election in writing at any time and a copy of such revocation shall be forwarded to the director within five days after the same is made.
(4) Each health care provider who has qualified under the act shall post and keep posted in his or her waiting room or other suitable location a sign of a size and type to be prescribed by the director stating: (name of health care provider) has qualified under the provisions of the Nebraska Hospital-Medical Liability Act. Patients will be subject to the terms and provisions of that act unless they file a refusal to be bound by the act with the Director of Insurance of the State of Nebraska.
Notes of Decisions
Prendergast v. Nelson, 256 N.W.2d 657 (Neb. 1977).
· cites it 4× “Section 44-2821 (2), R. S. Supp., 1976, provides: “If a health care provider shall qualify under sections 44-2801 to 44-2855, the patient’s exclusive remedy against the health care provider * * * shall be as provided by sections 44-2801 to 44-2855, unless the patient shall have…”
Keller v. Tavarone, 628 N.W.2d 222 (Neb. 2001).
· cites it 2× “Section 44-2821(2) provides, in relevant part: If a health care provider shall qualify under the act, the patient’s exclusive remedy against the health care provider .”
Giese v. Stice, 567 N.W.2d 156 (Neb. 1997).
· cites it 2× “See § 44-2821. See, also, Prendergast v. Nelson, 199 Neb.”
Schmidt v. Heather Ramsey, APRN-CNM, 860 F.3d 1038 (8th Cir. 2017).
“See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 44-2821 (4). . S.S. criticizes the district court for focusing on whether a fundamental right was "violated,” rather than "burdened” or "implicated.”
Barry v. Bohi, 380 N.W.2d 249 (Neb. 1986).
· cites it 2× “" We reverse and remand for a new trial. The act provides a method whereby health care providers, such as physicians, may limit their malpractice liability with respect to patients who have elected not to remove themselves from its operation.”
Hitzemann v. Adam, 518 N.W.2d 102 (Neb. 1994).
· cites it 2× “Section 44-2821 provides in part: (2) If a health care provider shall qualify under the Nebraska Hospital-Medical Liability Act, the patient’s exclusive remedy against the health care provider or his or her partner, employer, or employees for alleged malpractice, professional…”
Gilbert v. Archbishop Bergan Mercy Hosp., 421 N.W.2d 760 (Neb. 1988).
· cites it 2× “Section 44-2821 (1) directs that [a]ny health care provider who fails to qualify under the Nebraska Hospital-Medical Liability Act shall not be covered by the provisions of such act and shall be subject to liability under doctrines of common law.”
Lozada v. United States, 140 F.R.D. 404 (D. Neb. 1991).
· cites it 2× “Specifically, plaintiff asserts that defendant’s hospital failed to file proof of financial responsibility, to pay surcharges levied by the excess liability fund, and to post notice of qualification under the Act, as required by Neb.”
Alegent Health Bergan Mercy Med. v. Haworth, 615 N.W.2d 460 (Neb. 2000).
“§ 44-2821(2). In this case, it is undisputed that Alegent, Huigens, and Critical Care had elected to qualify under the *466 NHMLA at the time of providing professional services to Haworth, and it has not been alleged or shown that Haworth elected not to come under the provisions…”
Jessen v. Malhotra, 112 F. Supp. 2d 917 (D. Neb. 2000).
· cites it 4× “4 Plaintiff argues that the NHMLA applies in this case to the exclusion of the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act, and she relies upon the following language of Neb.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 44-2821(2) (Michie 1995) (emphasis supplied): If a health care provider shall qualify under…”
Fales Ex Rel. Fales v. Books, 558 N.W.2d 831 (Neb. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 44-2821 (Reissue 1988) states that if a health care provider fails to qualify under the Act, he or she will be subject to liability under the common law.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 44-2821(1) — 1 case
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 44-2821(2) — 6 cases
Prendergast v. Nelson, 256 N.W.2d 657 (Neb. 1977).
“Section 44-2821 (2), R. S. Supp., 1976, provides: “If a health care provider shall qualify under sections 44-2801 to 44-2855, the patient’s exclusive remedy against the health care provider * * * shall be as provided by sections 44-2801 to 44-2855, unless the patient shall have…”
Keller v. Tavarone, 628 N.W.2d 222 (Neb. 2001).
“Section 44-2821(2) provides, in relevant part: If a health care provider shall qualify under the act, the patient’s exclusive remedy against the health care provider .”
Alegent Health Bergan Mercy Med. v. Haworth, 615 N.W.2d 460 (Neb. 2000).
“§ 44-2821(2). In this case, it is undisputed that Alegent, Huigens, and Critical Care had elected to qualify under the *466 NHMLA at the time of providing professional services to Haworth, and it has not been alleged or shown that Haworth elected not to come under the provisions…”
Jessen v. Malhotra, 112 F. Supp. 2d 917 (D. Neb. 2000).
“4 Plaintiff argues that the NHMLA applies in this case to the exclusion of the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act, and she relies upon the following language of Neb.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 44-2821(2) (Michie 1995) (emphasis supplied): If a health care provider shall qualify under…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 44-2821(3) — 1 case
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 44-2821(4) — 2 cases
Lozada v. United States, 140 F.R.D. 404 (D. Neb. 1991).
“Specifically, plaintiff asserts that defendant’s hospital failed to file proof of financial responsibility, to pay surcharges levied by the excess liability fund, and to post notice of qualification under the Act, as required by Neb.”
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.