Charitable immunity

Charitable immunity

Charitable immunity is a legal doctrine which holds that a charitable organization is not liable under tort law. It originated in 19th century Britain.[1][2]

The early form of charitable immunity in England did not provide immunity from suit; it only protected segregated funds held in a recognized equitable trust for the organization. See, Feoffees of Heriot’s Hosp. V. Ross, 8 Eng Rep 1508 (1846) (discussed in Callopy v. Newark Eye & Ear Infirmary, 141 A.2d at 278). In Heriot's Hospital, plaintiff Ross brought an action against a charitable trust which had been established for a home for fatherless boys, contending that he had been excluded from the home even though he was fatherless and otherwise qualified for the charitable benefits. By the time his case was determined, Ross was too old for admission, and the question was whether he was entitled to damages from the trust funds. The House of Lords held that he was not. In the House of Lords, Lord Cottenham in dictum pronounced that an award of damages out of a trust fund “would not be to apply it to those objects which the author of the fund had in view, but would be to divert it to a completely different purpose.” Heriot's Hospital was not a tort claim and did not address the issue whether a charity is liable to those whom it has wrongfully injured. Heriot's Hospital repeated an earlier dictum from Lord Cottenham in Duncan v. Findlater, 6 Cl. & Fin. 894 (1839), which decided, unremarkably, that highway trustees, under a public road act, were not liable for the negligence of independent contractors.

A blanket waiver from suit for charities did not exist anywhere at common law until it was adopted in England in 1861. See, Holliday v. St. Leonard, Shoreditch, 142 Eng Rep 769 (1861) (discussed in Callopy). Moreover, the concept of immunity had no sooner crept into English law than it was decisively repudiated. By 1866, the dictum of Duncan v. Findlater (and by implication that of Heriot’s Hospital) was overruled by Mersey Docks Trustees v. Gibbs, LR 1 HL 93, 11 Eng Rep 1500 (1866). See also Georgetown College v. Hughes, 130 F.2d 810, 816-17 (1942) (discussing history of doctrine).

Between the 1940s and 1992, almost every state in the United States had abrogated or limited the charitable immunity doctrine.[3][4] The doctrine has also been abandoned in Britain and Canada.[5]

The doctrine has especially been relevant, or discussed, in the context of child sexual abuse[1][5] and medical malpractice.[4]

Under the charitable immunity doctrine it was still possible to sue employees or volunteers of charitable institutions, so the doctrine's existence encouraged other legal arguments, such as the "captain of the ship" argument that a surgeon is responsible for everything that happens in an operating room.[6]

References

  1. ^ a b Marci Hamilton (November 29, 2007). "How the Push for Religious Accommodation Can Go Too Far: Two Important Recent Examples". http://writ.news.findlaw.com/hamilton/20071129.html. 
  2. ^ "Christian Brothers of Ireland in Canada - Charitable Immunity". carters.ca. http://www.carters.ca/pub/article/church/2000/cbrother.html. 
  3. ^ Jerold Oshinsky and Gheiza M. Dias (May 2002). "Liability of Not-for-profit organizations and Insurance Coverage for Related Liability". The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law 4 (2/3). http://www.icnl.org/knowledge/ijnl/vol4iss2_3/art_3.htm. 
  4. ^ a b Bradley C. Canon, Dean Jaros (Summer, 1979). "The Impact of Changes in Judicial Doctrine: The Abrogation of Charitable Immunity". Law & Society Review 13 (4): 969–986. doi:10.2307/3053152. JSTOR 3053152. 
  5. ^ a b "Re Winding-up of the Christian Brothers of Ireland in Canada". http://www.ucc.ie/law/odg/attachments/Christian_Brothers.htm.  184 D.L.R. (4th) 445, Ontario Court of Appeal, Court File No. C29290, Doherty, Abella and Feldman JJ.A., Heard: April 14, 1999, Judgment rendered: April 10, 2000
  6. ^ Murphy EK (October 2001). ""Captain of the ship" doctrine continues to take on water". Aorn J. 74 (4): 525–8. doi:10.1016/S0001-2092(06)61686-4. PMID 11665386. 

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Поможем написать реферат

Look at other dictionaries:

  • charitable immunity — see immunity Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of Law. Merriam Webster. 1996 …   Law dictionary

  • charitable immunity — A doctrine which relieves a charity of liability in tort; long recognized, but currently most states have abrogated or restricted such immunity …   Black's law dictionary

  • charitable immunity — A doctrine which relieves a charity of liability in tort; long recognized, but currently most states have abrogated or restricted such immunity …   Black's law dictionary

  • charitable immunity doctrine — The principle that relieves a charitable organization or trust from tort liability. 15 Am J2d Char § 152 …   Ballentine's law dictionary

  • immunity — im·mu·ni·ty /i myü nə tē/ n pl ties [Latin immunitas, from immunis exempt from public service, exempt, from in non + munis (from munia services)] 1: exemption from a duty or liability that is granted by law to a person or class of persons a… …   Law dictionary

  • Immunity — Immunity: Medicine Immunity (medical), resistance of an organism to infection or disease. Immunity (journal), a scientific journal published by Cell Press Law Amnesty law, immunity from past crimes Charitable immunity, immunity from liability… …   Wikipedia

  • Immunity — • An exemption from a legal obligation (munus), imposed on a person or his property by law, custom, or the order of a superior Catholic Encyclopedia. Kevin Knight. 2006. Immunity     Immunity …   Catholic encyclopedia

  • immunity from liability — An exemption from liability based on the nature of the defendant, such as a charitable corporate body; not nonliability under the application of tort law. Anno: 25 ALR2d 36. The rule that a judge is not civilly liable for acts done in the… …   Ballentine's law dictionary

  • complete immunity — Immunity granted a defendant as a matter of law by virtue of the charitable nature of the defendant, irrespective of the status of the person damaged or injured in relation to the defendant and regardless of the negligence of the defendant in… …   Ballentine's law dictionary

  • American Boychoir School — The American Boychoir School is a music boarding school located in Princeton, New Jersey. It is one of only two boychoir boarding schools in the United States, the other being Saint Thomas Choir School in New York City. The school serves boys in… …   Wikipedia

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”