 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Montoya v. Trinidad State Nursing Home2/10/2005
ORDER REVERSED AND CASE REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS
Rothenberg and Russel, JJ., concur
Defendant, Trinidad State Nursing Home, appeals the trial court's order denying its motion seeking dismissal, on governmental immunity grounds, of the complaint brought by plaintiff, Patsy Montoya. We reverse and remand with directions.
Montoya brought this action as the result of the death of her husband, who was a patient at Trinidad's nursing home. Montoya alleged that her husband was given an overdose of narcotics and died as a result of that overdose. Montoya asserted a wrongful death claim against Trinidad based on professional negligence.
Trinidad moved to dismiss Montoya's complaint under C.R.C.P. 12(b)(1) on the basis that it was barred by the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act (GIA), § 24-10-101, et seq., C.R.S. 2004. Trinidad argued that the operation of a nursing home did not constitute the operation of a public hospital for which a public entity's immunity is waived under § 24-10-106(1)(b), C.R.S. 2004.
In response, Montoya noted that a division of this court in Plummer v. Little, 987 P.2d 871, 874 (Colo. App. 1999), had construed the term "public hospital" to mean "an institution or place where sick or injured persons are given medical or surgical care." Thus, because a nursing home is an institution or place that provides for the treatment and care of sick persons, and Trinidad provided nursing care in a residential setting, Montoya argued that the nursing home operated by Trinidad constituted a "public hospital" under the plain meaning of that term.
The trial court denied Trinidad's motion, finding that the provision of skilled nursing care by Trinidad required the same standard of care as a general hospital. Accordingly, it concluded that Trinidad's immunity was waived by the GIA. Trinidad then brought this interlocutory appeal pursuant to § 24-10-108, C.R.S. 2004.
Trinidad argues that the trial court erred in finding that the operation of a nursing home constituted the operation of a "public hospital" for purposes of the GIA. We agree.
The GIA provides that a public entity shall be immune from liability in all claims for injury which lie in tort or could lie in tort except for certain categories of actions for which immunity is specifically waived. Sections 24-10-105, 24-10-106(1), C.R.S. 2004. As pertinent here, § 24-10-106(1)(b) waives a public entity's immunity in an action for injuries resulting from "the operation of any public hospital."
When we construe a statute, our fundamental responsibility is to give effect to the General Assembly's intent. Springer v. City & County of Denver, 13 P.3d 794 (Colo. 2000). We look to the statutory language, giving the words and phrases their plain and ordinary meaning. Walton v. State, 968 P.2d 636 (Colo. 1998). Additionally, in applying the GIA, we strictly construe legislative grants of immunity and broadly construe legislative immunity waivers. Univ. of Colo. v. Booth, 78 P.3d 1098 (Colo. 2003).
In Plummer v. Little, supra, a division of this court determined that a county clinic, which provided diagnostic services, evaluations, and other medical services to women on an outpatient basis, was not a "public hospital" for purposes of the GIA. The division noted that the clinic did not provide inpatient hospitalization services, that it was not licensed as a hospital, and that it was not affiliated with a licensed hospital. The division also noted that except for the provision of certain limited medical services, the clinic did not share many of the characteristics associated with a hospital.
The division also compared t
Page 1 2 3 4 Colorado Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|