Hartford, Conn. (August 9, 2023) – The Connecticut Supreme Court issued a key ruling on August 8, 2023 regarding the immunity conferred under Executive Order 7V for civil lawsuits against health care professionals and providers. Specifically, in Manginelli v. Regency House of Wallingford, Inc., et al., the Connecticut Supreme Court created a framework for the application of immunity under 7V, stating that, "for immunity to apply, the defendants must establish that (1) there was a lack of resources, absent an assertion of another relevant circumstance, attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic, and that (2) this lack of resources caused the acts and/or omissions at issue."
In its decision, the court reiterated that the language of Executive Order 7V clearly requires the defendants to show that a specific lack of resources attributable to COVID-19 caused the acts or omissions alleged. As such, there must be a direct connection between the lack of resources and the acts or omissions at issue. If this connection is not evident in the pleadings or documentation submitted in support of the motion, an evidentiary hearing may be requested to present facts that would meet this standard.
Based upon the specific facts underlying the Manginelli matter, the court upheld the trial court's decision to deny a motion to dismiss that was based upon an assertion of immunity under 7V. In doing so, the court stated that the evidence presented by way of an affidavit in support of the motion was insufficient. That is, it failed to set forth a specific and cognizable connection between a lack of resources due to the pandemic and the allegedly deficient care received by the decedent.
This holding represents the first appellate-level case in Connecticut that provides the defense with a clearer path to obtaining a dismissal on jurisdictional grounds when seeking to apply 7V in malpractice suits that arose during the COVID-19 pandemic. To succeed on a motion to dismiss pursuant to Executive Order 7V, practitioners in Connecticut must present evidence such as documents, affidavit(s), and/or request an evidentiary hearing that meets the standard set forth in Manginelli.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
