Posted on 12/19/2008 9:16:55 AM PST by FoxInSocks
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.
<snip>
The three dissenting justices argued, however, that the aim of the legislation was clearly "to encourage persons not to pass by those in need of emergency help, but to show compassion and render the necessary aid."
Justice Marvin R. Baxter said the ruling was "illogical" because it recognizes legal immunity for nonprofessionals administering medical care while denying it for potentially life-saving actions like saving a person from drowning or carrying an injured hiker to safety.
"One who dives into swirling waters to retrieve a drowning swimmer can be sued for incidental injury he or she causes while bringing the victim to shore, but is immune for harm he or she produces while thereafter trying to revive the victim," Baxter wrote for the dissenters. "Here, the result is that defendant Torti has no immunity for her bravery in pulling her injured friend from a crashed vehicle, even if she reasonably believed it might be about to explode."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
While it’s true that moving an accident victim can do more harm than good depending on the injury, my concern with this ruling is that it’ll stop people from helping others in need. Let’s say the car is really on fire, or someone is drowning, etc. What then? People aren’t going to want to risk being sued. Instead of educating people on what to look for before giving certain types of aid, we’re entering a world where everything must be left up to government-funded aid. Disgusting.
Okay, sir, if you’ll sign this document I printed up from LegalZoom.com promising to hold me legally blameless for my actions, I’ll pull your sizzling arse out of the fire, otherwise I’m afraid I can’t.
The architect of murder gets start billing
Yet another victim another staying
Silence, flashing lights, police line - Do not cross
Blood on the sidewalk, your aunt’s on the scene
Hide close to corners cuz I heard someone say
This poor sucker’s AAAAAAAA!
Casuality vampires, thirsty for blood
Casuality vampires, The river of .....
Casuality vampires ...............
Surround the TV, waiting for the last report
Of casualties
Jet crash, news cast, devil’s of disaster
How many were lost
Casuality vampires, see nothing but red
Casuality vampires, it’s in all of our heads
Stop to watch, standing still
Yet another carcass lying there
Earthquake, bomb blast, domestic brawl
What does it matter? How long is this flood
Casuality vampires, ride along the freeway
Casuality vampires, screamin’ for necks
Casuality vampires, laugh like ........
Causality vampires, look at all the rats
from CJ’s Casualty Vampires
Interesting case and good post. As much as the usual comments are going to get thrown at the court (and not without some merit), this instance is the one area where I could see that a good samaritan can do quite a bit of harm. If a good samaritan with no medical training pulls someone from a wrecked, but otherwise okay, car causing paralysis, does that person have some responsibility for his actions?
The woman who was injured
1. Was out drinking and got into a car with a drinking driver
2. Was rendered Paraplegic from it.
They are determining her cash award by the inability to do her “Dream Job”, a make-up artist at a studio.
Wouldn’t this actually put her in a better position per the ADA? She is not quad. Why can’t she still do make-up?
tell me about it. I know a software company that won’t do business in Texas and a couple of other states because of what it calls a hostile legal climate.
This just in: Police are searching for a suspect in a Look and Run incident.
Calif Supreme Court = Distilled Evil.
The douchebags sitting and doing nothing get all the credit. Heros of the street are political nuisances to them. Same thing happens to soldiers in Iraq with JAG.
It’s better to be the terrorist messing himself up these days. Idiot proofing America is the new doctrine of liberal utopia.
Lawyers win another one. Saving people is for professionals! What kind of person thinks that way? Maybe everyone should have a Release form on their person at all time, to have any potential victim sign them before they go ahead and try to save their life! The world has gone mad.
“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. “
I thought the roadside good Samaritan laws protected against liability even for non-medical? Imagine people being told, “See an accident? Keep driving. You don’t want to get sued and lose your life.”
Wow, Ted Kennedy is a forward thinker.
“Ms. Torti ran up in a state of panic, literally grabbed Ms. Van Horn by the shoulder and yanked her out, then dropped her next to the car,” he said, deeming Torti’s assessment of an imminent explosion “irrational” and her action in leaving Van Horn close to the car inconsistent with that judgment.”
I’d also condemn the ruling except for this. If the rescuer put the victim down next to the car, then the fear of an explosion doesn’t seem as if it was the motive at the time. I’d also want to know if the rescuer talked with the victim, or if the victim was coherent enough to respond before she was pulled from the car. And the article said the others present did not fear an imminent explosion of the car.
It is pretty widely known that crash victims should only be moved by professional personnel, and people should follow that advice except in extraordinary circumstances.
A tough one with no easy answer.
I guess we can call this Kitty Genovese Good Samaritan Law
It would appear so.
florida passed a law years ago preventing a good samaritin from being sued.....keep passing laws to allow people to be sued no one is going to help anyone....just doesn’t pay to be a good person anymore these days.....
“Police are searching for a suspect in a Look and Run incident.”
It wasn’t me it was anotha brotha!
Wow, Ted Kennedy is a forward thinker.
BTW, I am in tears. LOL. “Look and Run incident”.
“bent” as in over...??....lol...
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.