Estate of Heanue Ex Rel. Heanue v. Edgcomb

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that the Good Samaritan Act appeared to protect the defendant doctor who went to the hospital to treat one of his medical partner's patients but remanding to the lower court to determine whether the lack of fee was in good faith
• a doctor who has not billed in order to trigger the Act has not acted in good faith and does not enjoy the Act’s protections
• “The record in this case allows an inference that the reason no bill was sent for the emergency care was that defendant sought to trigger the Act.”
• “We may not depart from the plain language by reading into it exceptions, limitations, or conditions that the legislature did not express.”
• only a specific fee or bill for emergency care provided triggers the Act
• “The legislature could have easily said that the immunity conferred by section 25 is available to those who provide emergency care without deriving any economic benefits, but it did not. It specifically chose the term ‘fee.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).