Zane Cagle v. NHC Healthcare, No. 22-2757 (8th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
In June 2020, Plaintiff’s father died from COVID-19. He allegedly contracted the disease at his nursing home, NHC HealthCare-Maryland Heights, LLC. Plaintiff brought suit in Missouri state court against the nursing home, three corporate entities that own the facility, and twelve administrators and medical professionals employed by NHC HealthCare-Maryland Heights, LLC. The nursing home and the three corporate entities removed the case to federal court, but the district court concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and remanded the case to state court. The NHC entities appealed and argued that removal was proper.
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the remand order of the district court. The court explained that the PREP Act immunizes covered individuals from suit for injuries “caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual of a covered countermeasure.” The Act provides no immunity where a covered person’s “willful misconduct” is the proximate cause of a person’s injuries. The statute creates an exclusive federal cause of action for claims based on willful misconduct. The court explained that the NHC entities assert that the nursing home “acted under” the direction of a federal officer because the government designated nursing homes as “critical infrastructure” during the COVID-19 pandemic and subjected these facilities to extensive regulation. However compliance with even pervasive federal regulation is not sufficient to show that a private entity acted under the direction of a federal officer. Thus, the court found that removal is not authorized under 28 U.S.C. Section 1442.
Court Description: [Colloton, Author, with Wollman and Gruender, Circuit Judges] Civil case - COVID-19. Plaintiff alleged his father died from COVID-19 at his nursing home as a result of the home's failure to conduct a proper quarantine, adequately train its staff, and keep sick staff from patients. The defendants removed the case to federal court, but the district court remanded it to state court. Defendants appeal. The district court did not err in remanding the matter as there was not complete diversity; the federal PREP Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 247d-6d(a)(1) does not completely preempt plaintiff's state law theories of liability; removal was not authorized by the federal officer removal statute - 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1442.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.