Sovereign Immunity: Principles and Application in Medical Malpractice

Abstract

Tort law seeks accountability when parties engage in negligent conduct, and aims to compensate the victims of such conduct. An exception to this general rule governing medical negligence is the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Historically, individuals acting under the authority of the government or other sovereign entity had almost complete protection against tort liability. This article addressed the following: (1) the development of sovereign immunity in law, (2) the lasting impact of the Federal Tort Claims Act on sovereign immunity, and (3) the contemporary application of sovereign immunity to medical malpractice, using case examples from Virginia and Florida. I performed an Internet search to identify sources that addressed the concept of sovereign immunity, followed by a focused search for relevant articles in PubMed and LexisNexis, literature databases for medical and legal professionals, respectively. Historically, sovereign liability conferred absolute immunity from lawsuits in favor of the sovereign (ie, the government). Practical considerations in our democratic system have contributed to an evolution of this doctrine. Understanding sovereign immunity and its contemporary application are of value for any physician interested in the debate concerning medical malpractice in the United States. Under certain circumstances, physicians working as employees of the federal or state government may be protected against individual liability if the government is substituted as the defendant.