Iowa Supreme Court Rejects COVID Wrongful Death Action Against Nursing Home
- January 30, 2026
A nursing home was shielded from liability in a wrongful death action brought by a former resident’s children because they failed to show the facility’s failure to comply with federally recommended infection control practices rose to the level of reckless or willful misconduct, the Iowa Supreme Court held January 22.
The sons of Jack Rose brought the action against Oakland Manor, a Medicaid-participating skilled nursing facility, after their father, a former resident of the nursing home, passed away from COVID.
As did many other states during the COVID-19 pandemic, Iowa enacted a law to shield health care providers from liability for injuries or death related to the virus. The law included an exception “for any act or omission which constitutes recklessness or willful misconduct.”
Rose, a resident of Oakland Manor, tested positive for COVID-19 the day he was admitted to a hospital for a suspected stroke. The death certificate indicated Rose’s immediate cause of death as COVID-19, though it also listed a number of other significant medical conditions.
Following a state survey of the facility, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a statement of deficiencies to Oakland Manor, including that it was not in compliance with federally recommended practices for preventing the spread of COVID-19. The CMS report noted that 30 of the 31 residents at the facility tested positive for COVID-19 during the pandemic.
After hearing news reports about the CMS findings, plaintiffs sued Oakland Manor for wrongful death. The nursing home moved for summary judgment, citing its statutory immunity under the Iowa shield law. Granting the motion, the trial court held plaintiffs failed to create a triable issue of fact that Oakland Manor acted recklessly. The Iowa Supreme Court affirmed.
Iowa law imposes a high bar to establish recklessness in this context. As an example, the high court cited a Missouri case where a hospital placed a COVID-infected roommate with a woman who had contracted specifically for a private room as sufficient to show recklessness.
Unlike that case, there was no evidence that Oakland manor “took deliberate action in violation of the patient’s contract,” rather the record reflected “only lapses in infection control protocols.”
Deficiencies cited in the CMS report, including failing to screen some residents, inconsistent sanitization and hand hygiene habits, and failure to always change gowns and gloves “sound in negligence, perhaps even negligence per se, but not recklessness,” the high court said. The deficiencies at issue were the kind the legislature intended to shield health care providers from liability for as a matter of public policy during the pandemic.
Rose v. Oakland Manor Mgmt. Servs., LLC, No. 23–1788 (Iowa Jan. 23, 2026).