No good deed goes unpunished, or so goes the saying. Such was the case with Lisa Torti, who is being sued for pulling a now-paralyzed friend from the wreckage of a Los Angeles car accident in 2004. The victim’s lawyers claim the Good Samaritan bumbled the rescue and caused injury by yanking her friend “like a rag doll” to safety.
But Torti — now a 30-year-old interior designer from Las Vegas — said she thought she had seen smoke and feared the car would explode. She claims she was only trying to help her friend, Alexandra Van Horn, and her own life has been adversely affected by the incident.
“I know [Van Horn] has a lot of financial issues and her life has changed,” she said. “But it’s not my fault. I can’t be angry at her, only the path she has chosen to take. I can only pray it helps her.” “I don’t have any more fight left,” Torti told ABCNews.com, choking back tears. “It’s really emotional.” The California Supreme Court ruled this week that Van Horn may sue Torti for allegedly causing her friend’s paralysis. The case — the first of its kind — challenges the state’s liability shield law that protects people who give emergency assistance.
The court ruled 4-3 that only those administering medical care have legal immunity, but not those like Torti, who merely take rescue action. The justices said that the perceived danger to Van Horn in the wrecked car was not “medical.”
Tough call. Now you know why many people are disinclined to help others.
Gee, what a stupid outcome. So, if there is a fire in a hospital, no need for a doctor to respond to help move his patient because thats not medical services?
Flies in the face of the concept of “Good Samaritan.” Its not “Good Doctor” law.
Well, not being a doctor myself, I guess my fellow man can just burn to death, and I can rest in good conscience.
Seriously, I am surprised a liberal court doing this. An activist judge should be about requiring intervention more often and encouraging that by finding the Good Samaritan law to have the meaning it has had for the past 50 years===as long as you don’t intend to do harm during the rescue, you get a free pass on any harm.
Stupid judges. Time for the Legislature to pass the law with clarification. I won’t hold my breath.
Yes, being burned alive is not a medical situation that needs to be attempted to save someone from. This needs to be settled for $100,000 over several years in courts.
Actually we see that people get CPR training, and they should also get FIRST respondor training to NOT MOVE the victim in any way, nor remove any sharp objects that puncture the patient (they act as plugs to stop bleeding). Unless you see flames, let them stay there. Stupid hollywood has people training to yank you from a car, when it is best to stay put (usually safer with steel around you protecting you).
So, at least for now in California, a lay person must be educated enough to know the difference between “medical assistance” and “anything else”, which may include rescue, in order to make the proper decision on their own personal liability.
I read about this via a Digg post as well and found myself pondering the same posted here, “If you help, it better only be medical assistance, because if a lawyer can change your ‘medical assistance’ into something else then you’re liable” Therefore, you can watch someone burn to death, before or after you’ve done your ABC’s of medical assistance, in their own car because you’re now allowed to move them (aka rescue) and stay immune under the Good Samaritan Law.
However, beware of those “failure to render aid” laws/statutes in states that have them or “Damned if you do. Damned if you don’t.”
When I was doing an advanced First Aid course I remember our instructor mentioning that in many cases it’d be better if we just turned away as it was entirely possible that we’d be sued for things like breaking a person’s rib while performing CPR to keep them alive, even though they’d be dead otherwise.
A very sad state of affairs.
Fire in the hospital is DEFEND IN PLACE because moving patients from the ICU can kill them. Look up the fire cope (NFPA99) some time.
Why can’t God be sued as well? If you follow the chain of legal liability surely one must conclude that God is ultimately responsible.
How to be a hero
1. Maintain constant vigilance for situations that require heroic action.
2. Learn not to fear conflict for taking a stand.
3. Imagine alternative future scenarios beyond the present moment.
4. Resist the urge to rationalize and justify inaction.
5. Trust that people will appreciate heroic (and frequently unpopular) actions.
It’s time for everyone to stand up and do the right thing. Have courage and integrity, be honest and forthright. Don’t lie, cheat or steal. Demand this of yourselves and others.
#5–offroad. Most of any hospital is not ICU. I certainly hope the law would allow people to make a fact specific risk assessment and determine which route has the most risk? Move or defend in place. BUT, given this lawsuit result, things could be as bad as you say.
Up here in Washington (state): if you don’t help, you get sued; if you help, you get sued; if someone trespasses/burgles your property and get hurt, you get sued; you fart and you get sued…
This is why I think it’s time to thin the herd (of our species)…
I posted this in CA, a few days ago..
http://cagematch.dvorak.org/index.php/topic,6006.msg25427.html#msg25427
what compensation should a couple drunks have, AFTEr they kill the car??
Its getting HARDER to be nice to people.
AND TV isnt helping…
when ANY car hits ANYTHING, it explodes??
The problem on TV is that EVERY car explodes…
And it does it VERY WELL..BOOOM!!
And it gives us a FALSe sense of IMPENDING DANGER..
Even at that, the person will be FINED and need to pay for her friend..HOPEFULLY she has insurance to cover…BUT, she wont.
There was NO fire, and NO FIRE HAZARD..
the other 2 should be Fined for reckless driving and Endangerment as well as DWI..
this is all very simple.
in america, you only have significant health care if you are lucky enough have a job where they offer it, or lucky enough to have a job that pays enough to afford it.
the woman’s paralyzed, and is going have very huge expenses related to that.
my bet is that she has to sue someone, or face financial ruin.
such is life in america.
It’s Los Angeles, California. What do you expect common sense? So what if there was no REAL fire hazard any arm chair quarterback could’a told ya that.
#11 – grog
#11 – grog
Bingo!
Even if this fails in court, the perception will spread among the public that stepping in to help someone is bad. As if we need to make the erosion of civility in America any worse. Geez.
Not a problem for me, I just mind my own business. F everyone else.
I saw an accident like this. There was fluid coming from the car in the middle of the intersection. It was radiator fluid, since the front of the car was smashed. The person behind the wheel was groggy and out of it (post airbag deployment) but otherwise breathing and conscious.
Any idiot should know not to move a trauma victim who is stable, but some nitwit decided the fluid was gas and risked her life, and then decided to pull the poor woman from the car, through traffic which was going around them to “safety.”
She was convinced of her do-goodieness and righteousness despite being wrong. In such a case I don’t feel sorry for the “Retarded Samaritan.”
#18 Von Reiesling…I’d like to think that in your situation I would have taken charge until someone better qualified than me showed up.
And I blame that ‘pull them out of the wreckage’ mentality on the movies where cars always blow up. They always blow up in the movies. And this is the result.
I agree with skatterbrainz (#16). From now one, don’t do anything, keep your head down and to Hell with everyone else. The next time I see someone in a wrecked car or a car accident I will be sure to do the “right thing” and keep on going. I won’t stop and assist and I’ll drive away with a warm, fuzzy feeling inside. Why? I know that I won’t be sued!
#20 Think again. You will get sued for not assisting someone in danger..
20, there is a law against that..If you are capable, you MUST give assistance..
KEY WORD: CAPABLE… A Doctor could DEBATE THIS, as he is NOT a trauma Doctor..
21…CORRECT..
actually this will be a boon to laywers..
Not only can they convince people to sue for helping, but after this they can also convince victims (or their families) to sue for NOT helping.. they get you coming or going.
Damned if you do… damned if you don’t.
First thing we do is kill all the lawyers.
Most statutes in cases like this require “Reasonable” action be taken. Trained responders know better than to move a trapped / injured person unless there is a serious, obvious, and imminent danger of further injury occurring.
If this “Good Samaritan” used her gut instinct to pull the injured woman from the car when there was no obvious danger, she is the one that injured the passenger. If there had actually been a fire then she could justify her action. Merely stating a fear is not a reasonable excuse.
As someone pointed out above, in CPR it doesn’t matter if you break the person’s ribs. They would be dead otherwise. That doesn’t give you an excuse to go around breaking people’s ribs though.
True Fusion,
BUT, we can BLAME TV for showing that EVERY car explodes…On contact with ANYTHING..
I was a volunteer EMT back in the 70’s. I don’t know what it’s like now, but back then small communities had to depend on volunteer ambulance crews. I guess there won’t be many of those in the future. Changes in precedent of the Good Samaritan Law, WILL cause a rise in insurance costs for ambulance companies, and will probrably affect how they intervene. Imagine this, you’re in a car accident that looks like you may have had some back injury. When the ambulance arrives they see your condition and decide they can’t touch you and call the med evac helicopter. Unfortunately your insurance doesn’t cover that, kaching!
Gramps scratches his head and remembers the good old days.
So…
Pull out your cell phone and dial 911, which should fulfill that “Give Assistance” law and leave it to the first responders…
Let the suckers fall on the grenade of helping there fellow man!
So much for 2000+ years of civilization!
… and the self righteous idiots will continue to find an excuse not to do anything. How convenient to now have a court case to fall back on to prove your stupidity.
How does anyone know that this lady’s neck wasn’t already busted up before she was pulled from the wreckage? She couldn’t move when she was in the car.
The person who is being sued was 24 at the time when she pulled out her friend. You guys can take all the jabs you want about it being “Hollywood” and cars not always “exploding like in the movies” but hey that is ridiculous. How many of you would act perfectly calm in an emergency? We are human and we are all capable of panic. I’m extremely surprised that the courts aren’t protecting her as a good samaritan.
The money it is going to cost the courts would be better spent just giving the paralyzed girl some funds to work with. And if it is true… it is really sad that the girl being sued has had her relationship “jolted” with her parents because of the homeowners insurance thing. Her parents should be there for here no matter what in this case.
Sad.