Opinion ID: 2148928
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: emtala instruction

Text: Instruction No. 14 given to the jury advised that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), [13] a federal law regarding the transferring of patients between health care facilities, contained certain provisions. One provision was that an appropriate transfer occurred when the receiving facility has available space and has agreed to accept transfer of the individual. Instruction No. 14 further provided: A violation of [EMTALA] can result in [a] significant monetary fine. (This is not the verbatim language from this subsection, but a synopsis.) The special administrator argues on appeal that the court erred in giving the instruction because it addressed the civil and criminal penalties associated with violation of EMTALA and confused the jury. [14] In an appeal based on a claim of an erroneous jury instruction, the appellant has the burden to show that the questioned instruction was prejudicial or otherwise adversely affected a substantial right of the appellant. [15] We find nothing in the language of this instruction that could have prejudiced Karel or confused the jury.