Trying to be a good Samaritan (at least in California)? Beware: you could be sued for rendering "non-medical" help, instead.
Carol J. Williams of the Los Angeles Times has the interesting legal development:
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.
STOP KICKING! see? now sign the pink and yellow copies and we'll get this rescue on.
thanks.
Good people should not be punished for rendering good aid. The stupid and clueless, however should be no where near an emergency, especially when intoxicated; as it looks like was the case here.
That may not be horrific, but certainly pretty unusual.