Man sues co-worker for saving his life.

[Rett Mikhal]

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081218/ap_on_re_us/samaritan_protection

"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.

Torti had argued that she should still be protected from a lawsuit because she was giving "medical care" when she pulled her friend from a car wreck.

Alexandra Van Horn was in the front passenger seat of a car that slammed into a light pole at 45 mph on Nov. 1, 2004, according to her negligence lawsuit.

Torti was a passenger in a car that was following behind the vehicle and stopped after the crash. Torti said when she came across the wreck she feared the car was going to explode and pulled Van Horn out. Van Horn testified that Torti pulled her out of the wreckage "like a rag doll." Van Horn blamed her friend for her paralysis.

Whether Torti is ultimately liable is still to be determined, but Van Horn's lawsuit can go forward, the Supreme Court ruled.

Beverly Hills lawyer Robert Hutchinson, who represented Van Horn, said he's pleased with the ruling.

Torti's attorney, Ronald Kent, of Los Angeles didn't immediately return a telephone call."



I'm sure the 45 mph vacation into the telephone pole had nothing to do with you being paralyzed. I'm sure it was the 100 pound woman dragging you a few meters. Obviously.

Remember in nature class, when teachers told you never to touch youngling animals because their mother would reject them if you did? That's kinda the moral sense about society now. No matter what, never, ever even think about getting involved with anything; especially if it helps.

Great encouragement.

[dex]

"a person is not obligated to come to someone's aid."

What?! Yes, they are. They are just not obligated to put themselves in danger. Does someone know the relevant law(s) in the U.S.?

Dec 21, 2008 11:16:41 GMT -5 Rett Mikhal said:

I'm sure the 45 mph vacation into the telephone pole had nothing to do with you being paralyzed. I'm sure it was the 100 pound woman dragging you a few meters. Obviously.

Well, yeah. Of course it is entirely possible it was a combination of the two. Still, it shouldn't legally or morally be considered as the Samaritan's fault.

Great encouragement.

Exactly. Let's hope the real law suit fails.

However, this (possibly) shows people are educated by Hollywood rather than school:

“she feared the car was going to explode”

This happens much less easily in real life than in movies.

[sirgallahad2]

Yep, that's a Californian for you. Lawyers are the lowest form of filth (next to reporters) As long as they get their pay check, They will crusade any cause.

[TheLuckyOne]

You are a foolish, foolish person, gallahad. I honestly hope you are never in a situation where you require legal representation of any kind, given your apparent distaste for the entire profession.

By all means, though, yes- all lawyers are evil. Every innocent person who has ever won their freedom in court defended themselves, to the best of my knowledge.

-D

[pfrsue]

I'm still looking for the "man" who sued the co-worker. Looked like a woman to me, unless Alexandra is the new Bob.

I remember "back in the day" when I took my first CPR course, that a person administering CPR could be at risk of a lawsuit. (After all, at the very least, chest compressions can/will break ribs.) Thus the advent of Good Samaritan laws in many states.

The sad fact is, one person thought they were doing the right thing, but apparently there's sufficient evidence that she did the right thing the wrong way, and another person is paralyzed as a result. That's tragic, coming and going.

But can we please agree that the legal community, like all other professions, has its share of both morally upright and downright unscrupulous people?

[rabidmonkeys]

It is quite possible that this woman was paralyzed because the woman moved her. Most people have not taken first aid classes, but that is one the things that they tell you, that if there is not an immediate risk (ie. fire), not to move the person, or you could cause further spinal injury.

I don't think she should be sued though. The good samaritan law should cover something like this.

[sirgallahad2]

Sounds fair to me Sue. Truth be told, my bankruptcy lawyer was actually a decent guy. I just think little of the ones who defend pedophiles and people who get injured robbing a house. Because of some lawyer, the owner of the house gets to pay the piece of filth robber for his "pain and suffering". It just seems to me that the legal practice has a larger percentage of scum bags.

[Rett Mikhal]

Dec 21, 2008 16:03:04 GMT -5 pfrsue said:

I'm still looking for the "man" who sued the co-worker. Looked like a woman to me, unless Alexandra is the new Bob.

You're right. My laptop's screen yields poor visability and I'm too stubborn to increase the text size for nostalgic purposes. I read it as 'Alexander', apparently it's Alexandria.

Dec 21, 2008 16:03:04 GMT -5 pfrsue said:

But can we please agree that the legal community, like all other professions, has its share of both morally upright and downright unscrupulous people?

The problem is even if there are good, morally just lawyers (and there are), the justice system in itself seems to reward inaction and bureaucracy instead of insight and overall, you know... justice. Anyone who's ever witnessed a real courtcase (and I said REAL, not on TV) knows the drill. Lawyers talk. Judge talks. Lawyers talk and use all their propaganda powers such as twisting stories and only saying some of the facts so it looks worse than it is, if anyone is a different color/race/speaks another language obviously it's racism, court case gets delayed, normal people with normal jobs have to both take another day off from work and pay their lawyers, case is denied again, again, again, each time the worker loses time off and the lawyers just rake in money. All this so the people in charge have to think very little... which you think would make the system FASTER, but in practice it's only made it lazier.

At least, that's what I've seen in my experience. Also one time a lawyer I hired was THREE AND A HALF HOURS LATE. Granted, there was a snowstorm, but it was pretty light for New England, and I've never been more than 15 minutes late for work in my underpaid underappreciated car. I told him if he had any other job in the world except lawyer or judge, and he was three hours late, he would have been instantly fired. He didn't take kindly.

[rabidmonkeys]

Dec 21, 2008 20:12:08 GMT -5 sirgallahad2 said:

Sounds fair to me Sue. Truth be told, my bankruptcy lawyer was actually a decent guy. I just think little of the ones who defend pedophiles and people who get injured robbing a house. Because of some lawyer, the owner of the house gets to pay the piece of filth robber for his "pain and suffering". It just seems to me that the legal practice has a larger percentage of scum bags.

I used to think the same thing about criminal defence lawyers, but I realized that they are also an essential part of the due process of the court system. That is how the court system remains fair, with one lawyer trying to prove the person is guilty and the other trying to prove they are innocent. Without criminal defence lawyers to cast doubt on evidence, we would also have alot more innocent people convicted of crimes they didn't commit.

[DTH]

Dec 21, 2008 21:59:57 GMT -5 rabidmonkeys said:

Dec 21, 2008 20:12:08 GMT -5 sirgallahad2 said:

Sounds fair to me Sue. Truth be told, my bankruptcy lawyer was actually a decent guy. I just think little of the ones who defend pedophiles and people who get injured robbing a house. Because of some lawyer, the owner of the house gets to pay the piece of filth robber for his "pain and suffering". It just seems to me that the legal practice has a larger percentage of scum bags.

I used to think the same thing about criminal defence lawyers, but I realized that they are also an essential part of the due process of the court system. That is how the court system remains fair, with one lawyer trying to prove the person is guilty and the other trying to prove they are innocent. Without criminal defence lawyers to cast doubt on evidence, we would also have alot more innocent people convicted of crimes they didn't commit.

Also, I'd just like to add that most Criminal Defense lawyers, specifically those in the UK, don't really get much choice in who they represent. Civil Aid being what it is, if its your turn on the duty rota that day, you have to advise that person, at least on the day.

I work in law and I know for a fact I'm not the scum of the Earth.

You're talking about that rare breed of "ambulance chasers", who encourage bogus or inflated civil litigation claims. I am sure these exist but I doubt they're as prevalent as Hollywood states.

I think in this case, one person has become paralyzed and is facing a very difficult life ahead of them and is looking for some kind of justice. Unfortunately, you are under no duty of care to help another person unless you already have an existing duty of care (such as a parent/child relationship).

Morally, well that's another matter entirely, but the legal point is correct. Once you do decide to act and help another person, you at that point assume responsibility for their welfare. Therefore, you have a duty of care to ensure you are helping them in the right way.

From a legal standpoint, this saviour should have made sure that the person was in no immediate danger and then contacted one of the emergency services. They have the correct training for such things and are also insured.

That said, I know I would have done what I could to help. But justice is indeed blind. It has to be.