Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Woman Sues Good Samaritan. Ridiculous...  
User currently offlineFRAspotter From United States of America, joined May 2004, 2350 posts, RR: 9
Posted (5 years 9 months 18 hours ago) and read 4407 times:

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

Some friend huh? The last part of the story says it all:

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

 Yeah sure


"Drunks run stop signs. Stoners wait for them to turn green."
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineShyFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 18 hours ago) and read 4398 times:

If Lisa Torti hadn't done anything, she would probably be facing a lawsuit for that.  Yeah sure

User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (5 years 9 months 18 hours ago) and read 4383 times:

This is stupid. The nerve some people have to make a buck and blame things on others. Now it makes me think I have to kind of be like Handcock when he wants to help someone "Do I have permission to touch you?"  Yeah sure


Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7703 posts, RR: 21
Reply 3, posted (5 years 9 months 18 hours ago) and read 4382 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Just super. Next time we'll leave you there to burn shall we? How would that be? Let's just not help anyone in an emergency then, or at least if we are going to, sit down and have a planning meeting beforehand where we carry out a full risk assessment of the proposed course of action, take legal advice on our plans, then carry them out under the watchful eye of an independent adjudicator who we then also submit a full report to afterwards for review. Would that be enough to not get sued? I'm guessing still probably not. Oh well, best leave you to burn anyway then.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5695 posts, RR: 44
Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 17 hours ago) and read 4362 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Shoulda left the bitch to burn.

On one hand I agree with the judge, there is a duty of care.
That would normally be if there is no risk of fire to not move the victim at all but if there is a fire(or serious risk of one) then all bets are off and you get the victim away as best you can.

My opening comment.. if this goes to trial let alone wins then many more WILL be left to burn!

Do judges not have a duty of care to the population at large?

Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineFlyMIA From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7174 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (5 years 9 months 17 hours ago) and read 4351 times:

Well first thing first, If the car was on fire than she is almost obligated to take the person out. But was the car on fire? The article did not say anything about the car being on fire. If the car was not on fire than she is responsible I think. This is being careless. Police or EMS would not have moved the women carelessly unless the car was on fire. I am a certified emergency responder so I am protected by the law for doing things which I am trained to do as long as I take care in doing it. But if I try anything out of my training than they can sue me all they want.
Basically there is not enough information in the story. Was certified or trained in medicine in any way and was the care on fire? If the car was on fire or smoke from a fire not just smoke from the air bags was coming out than I don't see this case going anywhere. But if the car was not on fire than she made a big mistake.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineIADCA From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 1290 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (5 years 9 months 17 hours ago) and read 4330 times:

The logic behind these kinds of rules is that by encouraging rescues by amateurs in situations like this, when they apparently weren't necessary (which is the crux of the judge's ruling), then you cause more rescues to be done by amateurs rather than competent professionals. It's all about affecting others' future behavior (though I think this aspect of the law is greatly overstated, particularly in simple tort cases like this). If the car had been on fire, it almost certainly would be an emergency rescue, covered by the Good Samaritan law, and summary judgment for defendant would have been granted. The judge found no emergency existed, or at least (and this is key), that there was a genuine issue for trial as to whether an emergency existed. Getting past a summary judgment motion is a low standard compared to the burden you bear at trial. Thus, as a legal and policy matter, this ruling is the right one, as unjust as it seems in the current case.

And folks, relax. All this was was the plaintiff getting past a summary judgment ruling. She'll still have to convince a jury to hold her friend liable at trial. That seems pretty unlikely, given what the natural human reaction to this set of facts is.

[Edited 2008-12-20 15:55:59]

User currently offlineStasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3283 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (5 years 9 months 17 hours ago) and read 4330 times:

No good deed goes unpunished....


"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlineFlyMIA From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7174 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (5 years 9 months 17 hours ago) and read 4311 times:



Quoting IADCA (Reply 6):

Exactly! Its not like the case was decided.

Quoting IADCA (Reply 6):
That seems pretty unlikely, given what the natural human reaction to this set of facts is. Simmer down now.

I sure hope none my friends would be stupid enough to pull anyone out of a car which is not on fire.

Again if the car was on fire good for her, if not I think she might deserve to have some punishment.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5998 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (5 years 9 months 16 hours ago) and read 4285 times:

I guess it will come down to whether or not the car was leaking petrol. If it was, it was probably a good idea to get her out of there asap. If it wasn't, eh, the defendant could always sue the hollywood studios to cover her loss. After all, in most Hollywood blockbusters, car crashes usually tend to end in a giant fireball of sorts - quite unlike most normal, real world car crashes (at least according to Mythbusters  Wink )

User currently offlineVikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10018 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (5 years 9 months 16 hours ago) and read 4270 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 5):
Well first thing first, If the car was on fire than she is almost obligated to take the person out. But was the car on fire? The article did not say anything about the car being on fire. If the car was not on fire than she is responsible I think. This is being careless. Police or EMS would not have moved the women carelessly unless the car was on fire. I am a certified emergency responder so I am protected by the law for doing things which I am trained to do as long as I take care in doing it. But if I try anything out of my training than they can sue me all they want.
Basically there is not enough information in the story. Was certified or trained in medicine in any way and was the care on fire? If the car was on fire or smoke from a fire not just smoke from the air bags was coming out than I don't see this case going anywhere. But if the car was not on fire than she made a big mistake.

 checkmark 

Very well summed up.

My CPR certification has lapsed long ago. Even though I remember how to do it, I believe I could be held liable if I tried to do CPR, and broke someone's rib or something.

Quoting IADCA (Reply 6):
The logic behind these kinds of rules is that by encouraging rescues by amateurs in situations like this, when they apparently weren't necessary (which is the crux of the judge's ruling), then you cause more rescues to be done by amateurs rather than competent professionals.

Worth stating that attempted rescues by amateurs can just end up causing more damage; or at least, putting themselves if not others in more danger.

Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 8):
I sure hope none my friends would be stupid enough to pull anyone out of a car which is not on fire.

I'm sure none of them would be stupid enough on any normal day. But once you get adrenaline and whatever other chemicals in your brain, spurred on by panic, fear, anger, or whatever, normal decision-making gets pretty darn hard.

Which is exactly why there are professionals to do this kind of thing.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (5 years 9 months 16 hours ago) and read 4251 times:

Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 10):
Which is exactly why there are professionals to do this kind of thing.

Lets say the car was on fire...

Do you wait for proper officials to get there to help the person and stand there and watch? I sure as heck would want someone to pull me out of that stupid fire.

[Edited 2008-12-20 16:32:33]


Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineFLY2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (5 years 9 months 15 hours ago) and read 4171 times:



Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 11):
Lets say the car was on fire...

Should've let her burn in that case.

So If I read the story right: bitch gets in accident, bitch gets pulled out by a well-meaning friend, bitch then backstabs friend by suing said friend.

Way to show thanks  Yeah sure


User currently offlineVikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10018 posts, RR: 26
Reply 13, posted (5 years 9 months 13 hours ago) and read 4092 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 11):

Lets say the car was on fire...

Do you wait for proper officials to get there to help the person and stand there and watch? I sure as heck would want someone to pull me out of that stupid fire.

You apparently didn't read the rest of my post....or any of the posts I quoted.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlineJetstar From United States of America, joined May 2003, 1646 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (5 years 9 months 13 hours ago) and read 4081 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The car slammed into a light pole, probably head on. I wouldn’t be surprised the radiator or something else in the cooling system was ruptured allowing hot steaming water to escape, ever see a car who has had a radiator hose break, steam which looks like smoke all over the place.

User currently offlineEuclid From South Africa, joined Apr 2005, 373 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 9 months 5 hours ago) and read 3930 times:

Have to add something here as well. Unfortunately Hollywood hype has probably conditioned the majority of people out there in the real world that a car will explode just about the moment it hits something.

As was said above, if the car was on fire, she did the right thing by pulling her friend out (ex-friend now, probably). If that's the case then this "friend" is an ungrateful bitch. However, pulling her out just because she thought the car was going to explode due to conditioning from watching too many films if the car was not even on fire, then yes, she should have left her well alone.

One December, if memory serves me correctly it was five years ago now, I was asked to be the designated driver for the staff at the motor dealership my dad was working for at the time for their year-end party, dropping people off at their homes when they wanted to leave and returning for the next person. As the evening was winding down there was only two people left besides my dad and myself. As these two ladies lived close to one another my dad and I took them home before then going straight to my dad's place. On the way back on the freeway that we had passed in the other direction a few minutes before we came upon a seven car crash. We were the third car to arrive on the scene, as this was about 2 o'clock in the morning. Three cars were on fire, fortunately not one of them with anyone in them. From personal experience that night I can say that burning cars DO NOT explode. All three of these cars burned down to the bare chassey with no spectacular explosions as seen in any Hollywood movie. Anyway, must have been a sad Christmas for some families as two people died in that accident. I myself for a pulse on a gentleman that was lying in the road in front of a wrecked car and found none. The other guy died in the ambulance before it had even left the scene.

This brings me to another incident that happened in about 1992 or 1993 at what is now the OR Tambo Airport.

A medical doctor was travelling at night on the freeway in front of the airport and hit the back of a truck. His car was crushed bad enough to trap him inside and it caught fire as well. Bystanders tried to get him out but couldn't. One of the bystanders then borrowed a gun from one of the other bystanders and shot the doctor in the head, thus sparing him from burning painfully to death. The guy then handed the person his gun back and disappeared. This was a HUGE talking point on radio and news for a while, with not one person that I heard calling into radio shows condemning what this man did. Every caller I heard backed this guy 100%, as did I. The person in question eventually did hand himself ovet to the police but nothing more ever came from this as far as I am aware. The doctor would have died regardless, so prosecuting this person for what was essentially an act of mercy would have been pointless and would probably have caused a huge public outcry as well. I'm sure some of the other South African A.netters here will remeber this incident well.


User currently offlineFr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (5 years 9 months 4 hours ago) and read 3912 times:



Quoting Euclid (Reply 15):
Have to add something here as well. Unfortunately Hollywood hype has probably conditioned the majority of people out there in the real world that a car will explode just about the moment it hits something.

I was going to make that point. I've been to hundreds of car wrecks, and not one of them has every exploded...not one. I've been to car fires and none have exploded. Fire is a danger, but explosions are not.

This case has some concern to me. I was an EMT with a volunteer fire department, among other things, but am no longer certified. The training is still there and I'm certainly sure I could easily function at an accident scene. But what is my standard of care should something go wrong? Would I be treated as an untrained person or an EMT?

This case is fraught with perils to the public. It is unfortunate, but it will make people think twice before attempting to assist, and I use the word assist vs. rescue for a reason, another in danger.

Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 5):
Police or EMS would not have moved the women carelessly unless the car was on fire.

Police and EMS are trained responders. The woman, and general public, are not. She did what she has been condtioned to do. She tried to remove her friend from the danger. I'll guess that if it wasn't a friend she wouldn't have intervened.

Quoting IADCA (Reply 6):
The logic behind these kinds of rules is that by encouraging rescues by amateurs in situations like this, when they apparently weren't necessary (which is the crux of the judge's ruling),

Apparent to the trained professional, but what about the person who just came out of a car wreck only to see her friend trapped in the very same vehicle?

Quoting IADCA (Reply 6):
And folks, relax. All this was was the plaintiff getting past a summary judgment ruling. She'll still have to convince a jury to hold her friend liable at trial.

I disagree, this is the proverbial camel nose under the tent or the slippery slope. Good Samaritan laws exist for a reason. Also, this women needs to defend herself in court. That means money. The judge is wrong, in my considered, non-lawyer mind.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineJAL From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 5085 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (5 years 9 months ago) and read 3788 times:

She should have let her in the car! Some nerve this woman had to sue someone who had nothing but the best intention!


Work Hard But Play Harder
User currently offlineFlyMIA From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7174 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3656 times:



Quoting JAL (Reply 17):
Some nerve this woman had to sue someone who had nothing but the best intention!

An airline has only the best intentions to fly their passengers safely, a doctor has the best intentions to take care of his patients, a janitor has the best intentions to clean the floors and put up the slippery warning signs etc.. But if any of these people do something carelessly than they did it wrong and have all the right to be sued. Again if the car was on fire than fine she had all the right to move the woman. If she saw steam and fluid leaking thinking it was fuel than I guess she had a right to move the woman from the car, being that she does not understand cars or really common sense and thinks of Hollywood car explosions.

BUT. If the car was not on fire and there was no reasonable reason to think the car would catch on fire this women should be sued or charged with something! She paralyzed her! That's a big deal. But of course a jury will decide.
Hopefully this will be big national news and many can learn from this. If there is no immediate danger call 911 and let trained professionals take care of things.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineFlyingbronco05 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3840 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3640 times:

She hit a post at 45mph! She was probably paralyzed before the lady pulled her out. I don't know anybody who can paralyze somebody just by pulling them out of a car.


Never Trust Your Fuel Gauge
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7703 posts, RR: 21
Reply 20, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3612 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 19):
She hit a post at 45mph! She was probably paralyzed before the lady pulled her out.

I have trouble understanding why she's not more interested in finding who is to blame for the real cause of her injuries, the accident itself. Has she simply gone for what she sees as an easy target legally and in terms of the potential payout?



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3550 times:

Excuse me, it looks as if the car is about to burn, although it is not actually on fire at this time, would you like me to wait unti the car is on fire assuming the rescue people are not here yet to get you out or would you rather I do it now? Okay, I understand you want out now, if you would be so kind as to sign here, and here, and here, and here, now if you would just initial here, here, here, and here. I have a tape recorder in my hand would you state your name for the record, your legal address, age, and would you please agree that you are not under duress at this time and have willingly agreed to allow me to pull you from the car, which is not on fire at this time but may be so in a little bit according to my laymens eye? And would you state that you will not hold me personally responsible for any further injuries you incurr during my pulling you out of the vehicle which is again, not on fire at this time but show signs that it may be on fire soon althouugh I fully admit that I am not an expert in the area? Thanks. Mind if I take a few pictures of you before I pull you out for the record?

User currently offlineNavymmw From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 257 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3540 times:



Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 19):
She hit a post at 45mph! She was probably paralyzed before the lady pulled her out. I don't know anybody who can paralyze somebody just by pulling them out of a car.

That is exactly what I was thinking. It seems much more likly that she was paralyzed by the accident rather then being pulled out of the car.


User currently offlineFr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5419 posts, RR: 14
Reply 23, posted (5 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3507 times:



Quoting Flyingbronco05 (Reply 19):
She hit a post at 45mph! She was probably paralyzed before the lady pulled her out. I don't know anybody who can paralyze somebody just by pulling them out of a car.

Apparently, you know nothing about mechanism of injury and anatomy. Yes, she may have been paralyzed by the impact. And yes, she may have been paralyzed by the rescue effort.

Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 18):
If the car was not on fire and there was no reasonable reason to think the car would catch on fire this women should be sued or charged with something!

"No reasonable reason". Who determines the reasonability at that very moment? It's very easy, in hind sight, to see that there was no immediate danger, but at that very moment...who knows?

Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 18):
If there is no immediate danger

Again, it becomes the bystanders' responsibility to determine the immediacy of the danger. Untrained bystanders.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Woman Sues Rangers' Pitcher posted Fri Apr 29 2005 20:29:18 by AA61Hvy
Muslim Woman Sues For Veiled Driver License Photo posted Wed May 28 2003 19:55:04 by Airworthy
Woman Sues Wendys posted Tue May 21 2002 02:30:20 by Jm-airbus320
Man Sues Woman Because Of A Blowjob posted Thu Nov 10 2005 16:27:52 by Racko
Good News For The New Orleans Economy posted Tue Nov 25 2008 08:37:12 by MSYtristar
Bill Ayers Good Morning America Interview posted Fri Nov 14 2008 07:42:02 by DXing
A Good Place To Visit By Train From Amsterdam? posted Thu Nov 6 2008 09:55:59 by CAP2008
Good News In Hesse / Germany posted Mon Nov 3 2008 02:20:33 by PanHAM
How To Make A Good Peppercorn Sauce! posted Wed Oct 22 2008 11:32:54 by Danfearn77
Convicted Murderer Sues Ontario Over Running Shoes posted Thu Oct 16 2008 10:48:44 by Dougloid