Background
Sokhom Prom sought care at Bethesda Butler Hospital on December 9, 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prom, an elderly patient at high risk of falling, was instructed not to get out of bed without help. The next day, her bed alarm sounded when she got up unassisted. A patient-care assistant had to don additional protective gear before entering under hospital COVID-19 policy; when the assistant entered, Prom was on the bathroom floor with a head injury. She later died from intracranial bleeding.
Bunnavuth Chhun, administrator of Prom’s estate, sued the hospital and two nurses for negligence, medical negligence, and wrongful death. The defendants sought summary judgment under H.B. 606, which expanded protections for health-care providers responding to a pandemic emergency. The trial court denied the motion, concluding the statute took effect December 16, 2020—after Prom’s December 10 fall—and could not constitutionally be applied retroactively.
The Court’s Holding
The First District affirmed. It first held that it had jurisdiction over the interlocutory appeal under R.C. 2505.02(B)(8) because the trial court’s ruling restricted enforcement of H.B. 606. Unlike a case involving application of an earlier version of a statute, the trial court here rejected retroactive application of the immunity statute itself.
H.B. 606 was not an emergency law and did not take effect either on March 9, 2020, or when the governor signed it on September 14, 2020, the court held. Under the Ohio Constitution, it became effective December 16, 2020. Although the General Assembly expressly made the statute retroactive, applying it to Prom’s already-accrued claims would substantively eliminate ordinary negligence claims against health-care providers unless the conduct amounted to reckless disregard, intentional misconduct, or willful or wanton misconduct. That retroactive effect was unconstitutional.
Key Takeaways
- H.B. 606 became effective on December 16, 2020, not when enacted or on the date to which it purported to apply.
- The statute expressly purported to apply retroactively, but its application to accrued medical-negligence claims was substantive and unconstitutional.
- A denial of immunity under H.B. 606 is immediately appealable when it restricts enforcement of the statute.
Why It Matters
The decision limits use of H.B. 606’s pandemic-era health-care immunity for conduct occurring before the statute’s effective date. Health-care defendants cannot use the law to retroactively replace an accrued ordinary-negligence claim with the statute’s heightened misconduct standard.