Client Advisory
Additional Recent Client Advisories
NJ Appellate Division Finds that Nursing Home Responsibilities and Rights of Resident Act Applies to Short-Term Acute Care Facilities
In Estate of Sahar v. 301 Union Street, LLC, et al., the New Jersey Appellate Division considered whether a long-term care facility providing acute care qualified as a nursing home under the New Jersey Nursing Home Responsibilities and Rights of Residents Act (“NHA”), N.J.S.A. 30:13-1 to -19, and whether a patient receiving acute care qualified as a resident for the purposes of NHA. Decedent Renee Sahar’s estate filed an action against Defendant 301 Union Street, LLC, for negligence and violations of the NHA, when the decedent, a resident receiving post-stroke care at the facility, suffered a fall causing a broken hip, complications from which caused her death.
Although the defendant admitted it was a long-term care facility, it disputed that it qualified as a “nursing home” under the NHA, which is defined, in part, as an “institution . . . which maintains and operates facilities for extended medical and nursing treatment or care for . . . individuals who are suffering from acute or chronic illness . . . and are in need of such treatment or care on a continuing basis.” N.J.S.A. 30:13-2(c). The NHA defines a “resident” as “any individual receiving extended medical or nursing treatment or care at a nursing home.” N.J.S.A. 30:13-2(e).
At the close of discovery, the defendant facility moved for partial summary judgment, arguing the NHA was inapplicable because the facility did not act as a nursing home in providing Decedent with temporary rehabilitation services. It also argued Decedent was not a resident under the statute; because the decedent was admitted to the facility following a stroke, her family anticipated that she would return home after her rehabilitation. The trial court denied the Defendant’s motion, finding, as a matter of law, that the facility was a “nursing home” and the Decedent was a “resident” as defined by the NHA.
At trial, the jury found that Decedent’s estate failed to prove that the facility committed negligence by deviating from the accepted standard of care but found that the facility committed an NHA violation and awarded $525,000 in damages.
Defendant appealed, contending in part that the NHA claim did not apply to the decedent because she was admitted to the facility for short-term rehabilitation. On appeal, in deciding this question, the Appellate Division considered the legislative intent of the NHA, finding that the driving force of the legislation was the Legislature’s desire to address concerns about the conditions of nursing homes and care facilities in New Jersey.
With this legislative intent in mind, the Court agreed that the facility qualified as a nursing home for purposes of the decedent’s care because it operated as a long-term care facility providing extended care. It found that the NHA’s definition of “nursing home” encompasses entities providing care to patients with acute conditions and did not require that facilities provide care on a “permanent” basis. Further, because decedent received “extended” care at the facility, she was considered a “resident” under the NHA. Even though the decedent intended to return home, the Court found that her extended care was sufficient under the NHA, and it was not necessary that she live at defendant’s facility permanently to qualify as “extended care on a continuing basis” as contemplated by the NHA.
Key Takeaway: Long-term care facilities in New Jersey may be required to contend with NHA claims, even for those residents receiving acute care. Long-term care facilities and their counsel should carefully consider at the outset of litigation not only how to defend claims of negligence, but also how to defend any pleaded NHA violations, including demanding discovery specific to any alleged violations. Further, long-term care facilities may consider engaging counsel to provide guidance or on sight training related to NHA obligations and standards.