Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Healthcare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances bill to clarify governmental immunity for University of Utah medical functions
Summary
Sen. Barlow's bill to clarify that University of Utah hospitals, teaching programs and associated clinics are governmental functions cleared the Senate floor and was placed on the third-reading calendar after debate about a Supreme Court ruling and the limits of the statutory damage cap.
Sen. Barlow introduced Senate Bill 53 as a clarification to return University of Utah hospitals, schools and related programs to the scope of governmental immunity the sponsor said the legislature intended historically. Barlow tied the bill to a Supreme Court case he identified as the Conde Marin matter, saying the court had left uncertainty about whether the $250,000 statutory cap applied to university medical functions.
"This bill is now before you to clarify that situation," Sen. Barlow said, arguing that the University of Utah's unique services — including an international burn center, neonatology and organ transplantation — made the institution distinct from other hospitals and merited the same immunity treatment historically afforded state institutions. He said the University purchased additional commercial insurance and maintained a self-insured fund, and he described how the earlier case had been settled by an annuity for a plaintiff.
Other senators pressed on the scope and consequences of the bill. Sen. Oke and others asked whether physicians employed by the university would become immune; the sponsor responded that the existing law and practice — under which the state covers liability arising in the course of employees' state employment — would not be changed. Sen. Barrett and others raised concerns from constituent attorneys who view university hospitals differently from other state agencies.
The body amended the bill on floor amendment and recorded a roll-call result placing the measure on the third-reading calendar. The transcript records the second-reading tally as "27 ayes, 1 [recorded as 'may' in the transcript], 1 being absent" and the clerk's announcement that the bill shows 27 ayes and is placed on the third reading calendar. The sponsor said he intends to include language in the journal on third reading to clarify legislative intent for any future court proceedings.
The debate repeatedly separated policy questions (scope of immunity and historical practice) from governance issues (how the university is administered), with senators noting constitutional limits on including separate governance topics in the same bill. Senators asked for additional information from University representatives before final action.
