Jeff, you bring up some very good points, but isn't or rather wasn't the issue at hand the alleged negligence of the would-be rescuer? All the court has done is allowed a person that apparently tried to use the "good samaritan" laws to avoid liability to be sued.

In the case you describe, even if the person acted negligently they couldn't be sued if they used the "good samaritan" laws, the case we're talking about has changed that.

Not an attorney, just an EMT in California, not far from where the original incident took place.

As for the call 911 and let them take the liability, I don't think so, the person calling isn't required to act according to the demands or request of a 911 dispatcher. If they were required to act, I can see where they might be able to claim that the dispatcher gave negligent orders.



JohnE