Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hope this hasn't been posted yet. Pretty pathetic story.
Calif. Court: Would-be Good Samaritan can be sued
LOS ANGELES – Proving that no good deed goes unpunished, the state's high court on Thursday said a would-be Good Samaritan accused of rendering her friend paraplegic by pulling her from a wrecked car "like a rag doll" can be sued.
California's Supreme Court ruled that the state's Good Samaritan law only protects people from liability if the are administering emergency medical care, and that Lisa Torti's attempted rescue of her friend didn't qualify.
Justice Carlos Moreno wrote for a unanimous court that a person is not obligated to come to someone's aid.
"If, however, a person elects to come to someone's aid, he or she has a duty to exercise due care," he wrote.
Calif. Court: Would-be Good Samaritan can be sued - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081218/ap_on_re_us/samaritan_protection - broken link)
Having read this twice in order to get my head round the apparent stupidity of this, I can only surmise that all of this is to do with insurance claims.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,023,210 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by bibit612
California is going fast and furious into the looney bin!
Yeah ... unfortunately my state rarely demonstrate common sense. Well... I better start praying that I never find myself in a predicament where I need the assistance of bystanders as insanity like this would cause people to not offer help.:sm ack:
I can see the sense of this. Really, I can. If the person caused more injury by helping another, then they SHOULD be held responsible for the additional costs of their medical bills.
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,023,210 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langlen
I can see the sense of this. Really, I can. If the person caused more injury by helping another, then they SHOULD be held responsible for the additional costs of their medical bills.
Well... Let's hope that bystanders would not be reluctant to help from now on when help is needed.
However, they should be ready to accept the consequences of their actions if they cause more injury.
I just hope I never face the situation where I have to weigh my legal liability against the instinct to help somebody out of a potentially fatal situation.
Or that somebody else will decide not to help me.
I just hope I never face the situation where I have to weigh my legal liability against the instinct to help somebody out of a potentially fatal situation.
Or that somebody else will decide not to help me.
I agree, I'm not condoning the action, I can just see the reasoning behind it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
