348 P.3d 602
Kan.2015Background
- KHP trooper arrested Wayne Thomas after a high-speed chase and crash in Wyandotte County; Thomas was handcuffed and placed in the trooper’s patrol car.
- The trooper transported Thomas to University of Kansas Hospital; Thomas initially refused treatment but later accepted and was examined while handcuffed; KHP trooper stayed about an hour and placed a “police hold” to be notified before release.
- Thomas (undisputedly indigent) incurred approximately $25,508 in medical charges; the Hospital Authority sued both the Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City (County) and the Kansas Highway Patrol (KHP) for payment.
- The County argued Wesley Med. Center v. City of Wichita required county liability when a state-law arrest leads to county custody; KHP and the Hospital Authority argued K.S.A. 22-4612(a) only sets a reimbursement cap and does not alter Wesley.
- District court and Court of Appeals held K.S.A. 22-4612(a) makes custody the trigger for liability and found KHP had custody when treatment was sought; the Kansas Supreme Court granted review and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether K.S.A. 22-4612(a) changed Wesley’s rule allocating liability to counties | Statute only sets a Medicaid-rate cap on payment where an entity is already liable; it did not change Wesley allocating liability to counties | KHP/County: statute’s plain language makes the agency having custody liable; thus KHP can be liable | K.S.A. 22-4612(a) abrogates Wesley; custody is the trigger for liability |
| Whether the statute is ambiguous or must be read alongside Wesley | Hospital: legislative history shows no intent to overturn Wesley; public-policy construction should preserve Wesley | Court: plain language controls; custody phrase is clear and displaces Wesley | Statute unambiguous; courts must follow its custody-based test |
| Whether "custody" requires continuous physical restraint/guarding during hospitalization | KHP: custody requires physical restraint/guard presence during treatment, so no custody if handcuffs removed/no guard | Hospital: custody exists if agency arrested/controlled the subject when decision to seek treatment was made | Custody is determined at the time the decision to obtain medical care is made; arrest/placement in custody by KHP suffices |
| Whether KHP or another agency (e.g., KU Police or County) had custody during treatment | KHP argued KU Police presence or later county custody could shift liability | Hospital argued KHP retained custody because trooper arrested and transported Thomas to hospital | Summary-judgment record lacked proof of custody transfer; KHP arrested and transported Thomas, so KHP had custody and is liable |
Key Cases Cited
- Wesley Med. Center v. City of Wichita, 237 Kan. 807, 703 P.2d 818 (1985) (held county liable for medical expenses when offender arrested for state law violation and delivered to county custody)
- University of Kansas Hosp. Auth. v. Board of Wabaunsee County Comm’rs, 299 Kan. 942, 327 P.3d 430 (2014) (discusses custody as trigger and statutory interpretation principles)
- Frick v. City of Salina, 289 Kan. 1, 208 P.3d 739 (2009) (presumption legislature knows existing law; used to analyze whether statutes alter precedent)
- Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Kansas, Inc. v. Praeger, 276 Kan. 232, 75 P.3d 226 (2003) (public policy can inform statutory interpretation when reflected in statute)
- Mt. Carmel Medical Center v. Board of County Commissioners, 1 Kan. App. 2d 374, 566 P.2d 384 (1977) (county liable where decision to transport to hospital occurred while prisoner effectively in custody despite no guards during stay)
- Dodge City Med. Center v. Board of Gray County Comm’rs, 6 Kan. App. 2d 731, 634 P.2d 163 (1981) (custody exists for liability when suspect apprehended and taken to hospital even without formal arrest/guarding)
- Allen Memorial Hosp. v. Board of Butler County Comm’rs, 12 Kan. App. 2d 680, 753 P.2d 1302 (1988) (protective custody leading to medical care triggers county liability)
- Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976) (constitutional duty to provide medical care to incarcerated persons)
- Youngberg v. Romeo, 457 U.S. 307 (1982) (state duty to care for institutionalized persons and associated liberty interests)