Hello, guest
|
Name: Joeys_Mam
[ Original Post ]
A court in the United States has ruled that a would-be Good Samaritan accused of rendering her friend paraplegic by pulling her from a wrecked car can be sued.

The Supreme Court of California has declared that the state's Good Samaritan law only protects people from liability if they are administering emergency medical care.

Justice Carlos Moreno ruled that a person is not obligated to come to someone's aid. "If, however, a person elects to come to someone's aid, he or she has a duty to exercise due care," he wrote.

According to the lawsuit, on 1 November 2004 Alexandra Van Horn was in the front passenger seat of a car that crashed into a lamp post at 45 mph. Lisa Torti was a passenger in a car that was following Van Horn and stopped after the crash.

According to Torti she feared the wreckage was going to explode and she therefore pulled her friend out. Van Horn has testified that Torti pulled her out of the wreckage ‘like a rag doll' and blamed her for her paralysis.

Torti argues that she should be protected from a lawsuit because she was giving ‘medical care' when she pulled Van Horn from the car.
Your Name


captcha

Your Reply here


 
Name: Joeys_Mam | Date: Dec 22nd, 2008 6:43 PM
My question is ... why is she not sueing the driver of the car, the person who rammed into the lamppost at 45mph? 

Name: jtorres24 | Date: Dec 22nd, 2008 8:31 PM
wow, that is crazy. I can not believe the nerve of her. She was trying to save her life and she sues her for pulling her like a suppose "RAG DOLL" Those type of people are just looking for money. it was probably her boyfriend driving the car and she doesn't want to sue him so she goes after the good samaritan..... that is so disgusting!! 

Name: ash2 | Date: Dec 23rd, 2008 12:20 AM
I know !!!!! I read about that and i was so mad. What ever happened to the good samaritan law ? I hope a judge sees straight though that. Thats obsurd. 

Name: Lola-May | Date: Dec 23rd, 2008 3:47 AM
I suppose she would have been happier to burn like a rag doll rather than to be alive?

Yeah it sucks to lose your ability to walk but losing your life would have been a whole lot worse. 

Name: Joeys_Mam | Date: Dec 23rd, 2008 1:38 PM
Well lets face it. She criticises the way she was pulled from the car, but the good samaritan was in a panic, risking her own life by going near a car she thought would blow up any minute, pulling a woman who probably weighed the same if not more. It's not as though she could have lifted her. It wouldn't have been an easy task. 

Name: cherisalorraine | Date: Dec 23rd, 2008 5:18 PM
My question would be why was she under the assumption that the car was going to explode? I mean seriously its not a movie and it isn't like it was really something that would be likely to happen. Even when a person panics they are responsible for their actions. I know that in Ohio she would have been prosecuted also if the passenger was awake and able to communicate. IF any one is panicking their best bet would be to allow someone else to take care of things. I am not saying that she didn't have the other womans best interest at heart or that she wasn't trying to help but seriously would any of you pull some one out of a car and risk more damage to them physically when you are in an area that has a high enough population to have light posts? The good samaritan law does protect people when they are doing the right thing and I am sure we would need to hear all of the facts from the case to make a judgement on who is right or wrong. 


Copyright 2024© babycrowd.com. All rights reserved.
Contact Us | About Us | Browse Journals | Forums | Advertise With Us