Originally Posted By: MDinana
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 court found her fear of fire to be unreasonable under the circumstances, not shared by anyone else at the scene apparently, and her unfounded fear of fire caused her to take precipitious action, yanking the victim from the car. The victim would have been better off remaining in the vehicle until help arrived. Obviously I can't separate an injury sustained in a 45 mph crash from one aggravated during rescue, a rescue that was poorly timed and attempted - but someone found that the rescue did actual harm, convincing evidence from a doctor's testimony probably. Whether we agree or not from 1700 miles away and perfect hindsight isn't really germane to the issue - there was a court, testimony, and a decision by a jury. If you or I were on that jury we would know all the admissible facts, we might have reached the same conclusion, or a different one.

I don't think the victim would have any claim against professional rescuers who would have pulled her from the vehicle, unless they acted as preciptiously or incorrectly (outside their professional obligation). In the words of Obi Wan, I just don't sense a disturbance in the force of the Good Samaratin law, at least not to the extent of others here. I'll still call 911, and if the scenario calls for it try to stop bleeding, or hold a head still until rescuers arrive. Even in California. That's not bravery, that's the reciprocal compact of the Samaratin law, which says if I stumble on scene I can give assistance within the limits of my training. Someone can later question that training, or I can exceed or perform poorly, but I am afforded some protection in return for making the attempt. If California actually interprets this such that samaratins should travel with a lawyer at all times, then it has a chilling effect. The improper actions of an untrained, possibly drunk defendant don't appear to have a great impact on me.

I now have to return to my storm preparations, the Great Wall of White Death approacheth the Pacific Northwest and I need to cache my frozen blueberries.