Lono, you make a good point, however, in the article it mentions that she DID fear the car would catch fire (though no others mentioned it).

My big qualm with this ruling is that, apparently, the court decided that the injuries sustained were the result of being pulled from the car, not hitting the pole at 45 mph. Gee, judges, and clairvoyent physicians, huh?

Who's to say this lady's injuries weren't exactly the same today as the second after the impact? The news article (as I skimmed it) doesn't mention whether the injuries truly were resulting from being manipulated after the accident.

Obviously, we don't have all the information. Still, the fact that the court is infringing on this law leads me to think twice about helping someone.