Opinion ID: 1753406
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Licensee

Text: Health Facilities Management first urges that under the clear language of Arkansas Code Annotated § 20-10-1209 (Repl.2000), only a licensee of a nursing home may be sued for violation of a resident's rights. It asserts that the license issued by the State of Arkansas for operation of the nursing home where Ms. Smith resided was issued to Little Rock Healthcare, and, thus, it is the only proper defendant for this cause of action. It claims that despite the circuit court's finding that Health Facilities Management was a de facto licensee, neither the circuit court nor this court has the authority to fashion a cause of action against Health Facilities Management under the statute. Because Health Facilities Management was not the licensee, it contends, the jury's verdict against it for violation of Ms. Smith's resident's rights must be reversed. The Estate responds that Health Facilities Management is a licensee under the resident's-rights statute under the facts established in this case. It contends that while the code does not define licensee as used by § 20-10-1209, the term is capable of consistent and sensible definition by reading it in conjunction with other statutory language. The Estate asserts that any group establishing, conducting, managing, or operating a long-term care facility is a de facto licensee. It further maintains that because Health Facilities Management entered into a management contract with Little Rock Healthcare, it was responsible for the daily operation and management of the nursing facility. The Estate avers that the General Assembly intended to allow residents to sue and/or recover damages from entities that operate, establish, conduct, or manage nursing homes in such a manner that the resident's rights are deprived and that any other interpretation would defeat legislative intent. The Estate finally contends that common sense mandates that the circuit court be affirmed in that Health Facilities Management is either a licensee in fact, or has committed numerous criminal acts in managing the Little Rock Healthcare facility without a license, and, thus, should be held accountable. [3] Our standard of review for issues involving the interpretation of a statute is de novo on appeal. See Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. P.O. Market, Inc., 347 Ark. 651, 66 S.W.3d 620 (2002). The first rule in considering the meaning and effect of a statute is to construe it just as it reads, giving the words their ordinary and usually accepted meaning in common language. See id. When the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, there is no need to resort to rules of statutory construction. See id. Our Long-Term Care Facilities Code provides in pertinent part: (a)(1) Any resident who is injured by a deprivation or infringement of his or her rights as specified in this subchapter may bring a cause of action against any licensee responsible for the deprivation or infringement. Ark. Code Ann. § 20-10-1209(a)(1) (Repl.2000). The Code further provides that a license is required to operate a long-term care facility: (a) No long-term care facility or related institution shall be established, conducted, or maintained in this state without obtaining a license. Ark.Code Ann. § 20-10-224(a) (Repl.2000). Long-term care facility, as used in § 20-10-224, is defined as any building, structure, agency, institution, or other place for the reception, accommodation, board, care, or treatment of three (3) or more unrelated individuals who, because of age, illness, blindness, disease, or physical or mental infirmity, are unable to sufficiently or properly care for themselves and where for that reception, accommodation, board, care, or treatment a charge is made. Ark.Code Ann. § 20-10-213(4)(A) (Repl.2000). [4] Licensee is defined by Black's Law Dictionary as [o]ne to whom a license is granted. Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed.2004). No license was issued to Health Facilities Management. The license was issued by the Arkansas Department of Human Services to Little Rock Healthcare # 1, Inc. Doing Business As Little Rock Healthcare & Rehab Center. Thus, under the plain language of the statute, Health Facilities Management is not a licensee subject to suit for violation of a resident's rights. A review of the referenced statutes, including § 20-10-224(a), clearly confirms that the General Assembly intended the facility itself, the one actually providing care, and not the manager of the facility, be licensed in accordance with the statutes. We give little credence to the Estate's argument that Health Facilities Management was a de facto licensee. There is no mention in the statutory scheme of a de facto licensee; thus, we conclude that it was not contemplated by the General Assembly. The mere fact that Health Facilities Management manages Little Rock Healthcare pursuant to contract does not change the plain language of the statute. Nor does the Estate cite to any convincing authority for its proposition of de facto status. Its sole citation is to State Dep't of Pub. Welfare v. Bland, 66 So.2d 59 (Fla.1953), which (1) is not authority for the interpretation of our statutes, and (2) is inapposite due to distinguishing facts. In Bland , no license had been issued for the daycare facility at all, and the court concluded that the operator of the facility could not avoid liability by simply not obtaining a license. In the instant case, a license had been issued by the State to Little Rock Healthcare. We reverse the judgment against Health Facilities Management. With respect to the remaining issues, they will relate only to Little Rock Healthcare.