Posted on 12/21/2008 5:29:32 PM PST by John Semmens
The California Supreme Court ruled that Lisa Torti of Northridge may be held liable for injuries to a woman she pulled out of a vehicle following a Halloween night crash in 2004. Combined with previous rulings holding that individuals may be held liable for not helping in such situations, persons finding themselves at accident sites are faced with a legal dilemma.
If no assistance is rendered, the passerby may be sued for damages occurring from his neglect to intervene. If assistance is rendered, the intervener may be sued for any damages caused by the intervention.
The Court ruled that the state’s Samaritan immunity law applies only to “medical type” assistance, like CPR, application of bandages, or the charging of excessive fees or padded bills.
“Accident victims have already suffered,” wrote Judge Peter Pettifogger for the Court. “Some means of compensation to try to balance the scales is our social responsibility. Those whom chance has thrown into the mix must be our first line of defense. If such persons have the means it is our duty to appropriate them.”
Pettifogger advised those unwilling to face responsibility for damages to “flee the scene before they are recognized or can be identified. Society has trained professionals for these situations. We must be confident that sooner or later, these trained professionals will arrive to take the appropriate action.”
(Excerpt) Read more at azconservative.org ...
No good deed shall go unpunished.
“Accident? There was an accident here?
Sorry, I didn’t notice. The big red “LAWSUIT ALERT” in my head kept me from helping.”
Way to go lawyers — let’s undermine the legislation AND ensure no one in their right mind renders aid.
Good one, John.
Disgusting.
Simply crazy! help someone get sued, don’t help them get sued. Heck next thing they will pass a law saying that if you are near a accident that the victims can sue you just for being there. Insanity rules in modern America.
CA is sure creating that spirit of being a good and friendly neighbor.....
“Judge Peter Pettifogger “
This is a joke, right?
How did Ca become such a screwed up state?
Y’know, these postings of yours are a real pain in the ass sometimes. They are too close to reality and not funny. It is hard enough to stay ahead of cynicism without your help. FWIW.
The name of the clown judge is actually Pettifogger?
Reminds me of the “Shoe” comic strip featuring Senator Bedfellow.
Trial lawyers and judges continue their efforts to destroy our society. Unfortunately, they are succeeding.
It would be ironic if some member of the Ca SC needed assistance and failed to get it because of this ruling. It has the makings of a Night Gallery episode.
This sounds unfair until you realize that if people couldn’t be sued under all circumstances, trial lawyers would be deprived of potential income.
See. Doesn’t it seem more fair now?
The line that catches my eye is the attitude about Accident victims have suffered already. I take it to mean, then, if one is unlucky enough to just pass by let alone try to help..well we should just face it..we are going to have to fork over our hard earned dollars to this accident victim who will also sue the guy who hit or actually caused the initial accident, the highway dept, etc...
So we too need to lawyer up to counter sue..lets tie up the courts real good..
This is just outrageous.
California Supreme Court allows good Samaritans to be sued for nonmedical careBy Carol J. Williams
December 19, 2008Being a good Samaritan in California just got a little riskier.
The California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a young woman who pulled a co-worker from a crashed vehicle isn't immune from civil liability because the care she rendered wasn't medical.
The divided high court appeared to signal that rescue efforts are the responsibility of trained professionals. It was also thought to be the first ruling by the court that someone who intervened in an accident in good faith could be sued.
Lisa Torti of Northridge allegedly worsened the injuries suffered by Alexandra Van Horn by yanking her "like a rag doll" from the wrecked car on Topanga Canyon Boulevard.
Torti now faces possible liability for injuries suffered by Van Horn, a fellow department store cosmetician who was rendered a paraplegic in the accident that ended a night of Halloween revelry in 2004.
But in a sharp dissent, three of the seven justices said that by making a distinction between medical care and emergency response, the court was placing "an arbitrary and unreasonable limitation" on protections for those trying to help.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-good-samaritan19-2008dec19,0,4033454.story
Damned if you do,
damned if you don’t......
It could very well be possible that the rescuer used no reasonable caution to pull the victim out and actually compounded the injury and could have made a recoverable injury permanent. I'm betting this is what happened.
Calif. Court: Would-be Good Samaritan can be sued
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2152133/posts
Calif. Court: Would-be Good Samaritan can be sued
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2151214/posts
California Supreme Court allows good Samaritans to be sued for nonmedical care
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2152041/posts
California Supreme Court allows good Samaritans to be sued for nonmedical care
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2151501/posts
Calif. Court: Would-be Good Samaritan can be sued
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2151214/posts
Torti now faces possible liability for injuries suffered by Van Horn, a fellow department store cosmetician who was rendered a paraplegic in the accident that ended a night of Halloween revelry in 2004.
John Semmens Just reading the excerpt can easily create a knee jerk reaction. We don't know exactly what happen. It could very well be possible that the rescuer used no reasonable caution to pull the victim out and actually compounded the injury and could have made a recoverable injury permanent. I'm betting this is what happened.
What's reasonable depends on circumstances. If the car were on fire, it would be reasonable to remove the passenger from the car immediately even at the risk of worsening injuries. I was taught that in the case of suspected spinal cord injuries, let the professional emergency responders move an accident victim unless there is an immediate threat to life. I wonder how bright a typical cosmetitian is. Also just imagine the opportunity for trial lawyers the next time a 7+ earthquake strikes in California.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.