[Rhodes22-list] Hard Cases Make Bad Law- Rendering Aid in an Emergency.

[Ben Cittadino]

In the Spirit of the Christmas Season (sarcastic reference) I thought I would
reprint this blurb that came across my desk today. Frankly, although I
practice law as a plaintiff's trial lawyer I think this is a bad decision,
based upon a flawed interpretation of a statute that was passed in order to
encourage people to render assistance in an emergency. I am, quite frankly,
appalled that the Court would be so short-sighted as to ignore the long term
public policy good intended by the statute in favor of a misguided attempt
to find money to aid this one victim.  

To be fair, I haven't read the decision (only the blurb below), and I hope
there's more to it than appears in the brief summary.  

It won't stop me, and I expect it won't stop most of you, from rendering aid
in an emergency but the decision is a troubling one the say the least:


"CALIFORNIA HIGH COURT ALLOWS SUIT AGAINST GOOD SAMARITAN
The California Supreme Court ruled 4-3 last Thursday that the state's
immunity from liability for emergency help doesn't apply to ordinary
citizens coming to the rescue. The ruling, Van Horn v. Watson et al., allows
Lisa Torti to be sued by Alexandra Van Horn, a friend whom Torti pulled from
a crashed car she feared would explode, allegedly causing or worsening
injuries that left Van Horn permanently paralyzed. The state law, which bars
suits against anyone who "in good faith, and not for compensation, renders
emergency care at the scene of an emergency," does not distinguish between
types of emergency care, but the majority said the context shows it was
meant to be limited to medical care."

Ben C.


-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Hard-Cases-Make-Bad-Law--Rendering-Aid-in-an-Emergency.-tp21130736p21130736.html
Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.