Parents sued emergency-room providers after their six-month-old daughter fell, was evaluated and released, and days later suffered severe brain damage from an undiagnosed subdural hematoma and skull fracture. The trial court granted the parents partial summary judgment that Georgia’s emergency-room malpractice statute did not apply; the Court of Appeals reversed. The Supreme Court of Georgia affirmed the Court of Appeals. It held that conflicting evidence about whether the child’s condition and treatment constituted “emergency medical care” under the statute created a jury question. The Court also held that the statute did not change the ordinary summary-judgment rule requiring evidence and reasonable inferences to be viewed in favor of the nonmoving party. Whether the statute’s heightened proof standards applied, and whether the providers met the applicable negligence standard, remained for the factfinder. The case therefore proceeded without a pretrial ruling that the statute was inapplicable.