Michigan House Bill HB4108

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/25/25
• Refer: 2/25/25
• Report Pass: 9/17/25
• Engrossed: 9/25/25
• Refer: 9/29/25
• Report Pass: 12/4/25
• Refer: 12/4/25

Caption

Torts: liability; immunity for individuals rendering emergency services who apply bleeding control; provide for. Amends 1963 PA 17 (MCL 691.1501 - 681.1507) by adding sec. 8. TIE BAR WITH: HB 4109'25

Impact

The introduction of HB 4108 has significant implications for the legal landscape in Michigan, particularly concerning the encouragement of public participation during medical emergencies. By reducing the liability risks faced by individuals who offer emergency assistance, the bill seeks to foster a more proactive community response to emergencies. This could lead to quicker and potentially life-saving interventions in a variety of scenarios, including accidents or medical crises. The legislation also highlights the state's commitment to empowering citizens to act during emergencies without hesitance prompted by fears of lawsuits.

Summary

House Bill 4108 aims to amend the existing legal framework surrounding civil liability for individuals rendering emergency services, specifically related to initiating bleeding control measures in emergency situations. By adding a new section to the existing Michigan Compiled Laws, the bill ensures that individuals who voluntarily assist in an emergency by applying techniques such as pressure, dressings, packing, or tourniquets are granted immunity from civil actions, unless their actions are deemed grossly negligent or constitute willful misconduct. This legislative change is designed to encourage bystanders to aid those in critical need without the fear of legal repercussions.

Sentiment

The sentiment regarding HB 4108 appears to lean positively among supporters who argue that the bill addresses a crucial gap in emergency response by providing necessary legal protections. Advocates believe that the immunity provisions will cultivate a compassionate environment where individuals feel empowered to intervene during emergencies. However, there may be concerns about the practical implications of defining gross negligence and willful misconduct within the context of emergency care, as such definitions can vary and could potentially lead to confusion in legal matters.

Contention

One notable point of contention surrounding HB 4108 relates to the balance between encouraging lifesaving actions and ensuring accountability. While the bill seeks to protect good-faith responders, critics may raise concerns about the potential for abuse of the immunity clause, where individuals could act recklessly under the guise of providing emergency assistance. Additionally, the necessity of tying the enactment of this bill to another legislative measure (House Bill No. 4847) might raise procedural questions, emphasizing the intertwined nature of legislative approval and the overarching implications for emergency medical laws.