PDA

View Full Version : California Supreme Court: Good Samaritans can be sued...




Brooklyn Red Leg
12-21-2008, 02:39 AM
Wow, just WOW....I thought the people running California were douchebags. Now, I realise that I was wrong....they are MUCH WORSE!


A Good Samaritan whose well-meaning but careless rescue effort injures an accident victim can be sued for damages, the state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The court said California's shield against liability for emergency help applies only to people trying to provide medical help.

Anyone wanna take bets on this having a blowback affect? If this were a Just World, these four jizzbag judges that ruled this way would all be involved in accidents where Good Samaritans would leave them to their fates. I bet they have trouble from now on finding volunteers to help with earthquake SAR.

Anti Federalist
12-21-2008, 07:21 AM
Wow, just WOW....I thought the people running California were douchebags. Now, I realise that I was wrong....they are MUCH WORSE!



Anyone wanna take bets on this having a blowback affect? If this were a Just World, these four jizzbag judges that ruled this way would all be involved in accidents where Good Samaritans would leave them to their fates. I bet they have trouble from now on finding volunteers to help with earthquake SAR.

Heh, figures.

Wanna bet how successful a similar lawsuit against the "authorities" would have been.

Freakin Kalifornia.

FindLiberty
12-21-2008, 07:45 AM
...wanna bet how successful a similar lawsuit against the "authorities" would have been...

exactly

kirkblitz
12-21-2008, 07:57 AM
guess when the supreme court judges wreck ill let them burn alive in their car, theyll probably jail me because i didnt help. Fucked either way

yokna7
12-21-2008, 09:55 AM
Lawyers are the scourge of the earth

FindLiberty
12-21-2008, 10:12 AM
SORRY!

I'd like to apply my CPR skills on you, but the little paralegal voice in my head is saying, RUN AWAY!

Good Samaritan law in Nevada, it's a crime to fail to report child molestation. I'm sure other states have "failure to aid / report" laws.

Guess you are breaking some law no matter what you do or don't do. You are at their mercy (or lack thereof).

Reminds me of the final episode of Seinfeld. Jerry, George, Elaine and Kramer were all arrested for failing to report a crime and for failing to aid the over-weight victim of a car-jacking.

TastyWheat
12-21-2008, 11:10 AM
I'm not even playing devil's advocate here, I agree with the judges, but there shouldn't be any exception to the matter. Anyone should be able to sue for anything, but the loser, be it prosecution or defense, should pay the other side. Frivolous lawsuits shouldn't be without penalty.

sidster
12-21-2008, 01:28 PM
I'm not even playing devil's advocate here, I agree with the judges, but there shouldn't be any exception to the matter. Anyone should be able to sue for anything, but the loser, be it prosecution or defense, should pay the other side. Frivolous lawsuits shouldn't be without penalty.

I agree with your statement about frivolous lawsuits. But this is
a very dangerous case/precedent to have been set. i live in CA
and I would have trouble helping anyone knowing that I can get
sued after the fact. Even if I have the option to counter sue for
the "frivolousness" of their case. The amount of time and money,
which I may not even have to defend myself, are strong arguments
for not even getting involved.

"Oh, crap! Look, this lady rolled over her car and it looks like
she is stuck in there with her little babies. Oh no! Looks like
the car is on fire too."

"Sorry lady, I'm not sticking around for this one. I hope help
arrives in time."

"Oh, yeah, Merry Christmas"

sidster
12-21-2008, 01:29 PM
p.s., Anyone have sauce for the OP?

Dark_Horse_Rider
12-21-2008, 03:29 PM
Lucky they all didn't get tasered.

V-rod
12-21-2008, 03:32 PM
A little mixed on this. What if some idiot who tries to "rescue" you, causes a lot more injuries from his stupidity than if he left you alone to begin with. If the person is incapacitated then the rescuer should be held blameless I think.

TastyWheat
12-22-2008, 12:00 AM
A little mixed on this. What if some idiot who tries to "rescue" you, causes a lot more injuries from his stupidity than if he left you alone to begin with. If the person is incapacitated then the rescuer should be held blameless I think.
Yeah, it's not fair to make blanket decisions like that. Someone, with nothing but good intentions, could try to pull you out of a car and break a bone or dislocate a joint when you may have been perfectly fine waiting for the fire dept to pry you out safely. Again, I don't think it's fair to say emergency teams are free of any liability. They're much less likely to cause undue harm, but you can't say it would never happen.