Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Liability Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears opposing views on repeal of COVID‑era facility immunity (HB 10‑71)
Summary
HB 10‑71 would repeal limited immunity for health facilities that followed emergency directives during the COVID‑19 state of emergency. County administrators and nursing‑home operators warned repeal would expose facilities to litigation risk for compliance with government orders; sponsor said immunity should not be perpetual.
Lawmakers took public testimony on HB 10‑71, which would repeal statutory immunity currently afforded to health care facilities that followed regulatory directives during the COVID‑19 state of emergency.
Sponsor Representative Polozov described the measure as a cleanup — removing a form of ongoing immunity he said was no longer needed. He argued the state should not provide blanket, perpetual immunity for actions that may have caused harm.
County officials and nursing‑home administrators urged the committee to retain the limited immunity. David Ross, administrator of the Hillsborough County Nursing Home, testified for the New Hampshire Association of Counties that the immunity recognizes the chaotic, evolving conditions in which nursing homes were required to operate and that removal would unfairly subject county homes and taxpayers to litigation risk. He emphasized the immunity does not cover reckless or intentional misconduct.
Committee members asked whether repeal would be retroactive and whether removing the statutory immunity could expose entities to suit for following emergency orders; Rep. Polozov acknowledged uncertainty and suggested a researcher check statute‑of‑limitations interactions. The sponsor said he was open to a start date or other middle ground.
With no vote recorded, the committee closed the public hearing and retained questions about legal consequences and whether additional fiscal or legal analysis was needed before action.
