I did read the whole thing. Regardless of the fire that didn't exist, the first responder has seconds to make a decision; a court (lawyers, judge, jury) has all the time in the world to deliberate whether or not that split second decision meets their definition of common sense or negligence. I don't like being second guessed by people who didn't see what I saw.

Primary point being that since perhaps one of the best things to do is nothing and it is perfectly legal to do nothing, it will take open flame and an empty fire extinguisher to get me doing more. Assuming I'm not culpable for the accident, I can live with doing nothing, particularly when it's been determined by a court that doing more than nothing may be negligent.