Don't try to be a good samaritan in LA any more

[zerocool84]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...s/samaritan_protection

Calif. Court: Would-be Good Samaritan can be sued

LOS ANGELES ? Proving that no good deed goes unpunished, the state's high court on Thursday said a would-be Good Samaritan accused of rendering her friend paraplegic by pulling her from a wrecked car "like a rag doll" can be sued.

California's Supreme Court ruled that the state's Good Samaritan law only protects people from liability if the are administering emergency medical care, and that Lisa Torti's attempted rescue of her friend didn't qualify.

Justice Carlos Moreno wrote for a unanimous court 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.

Torti had argued that she should still be protected from a lawsuit because she was giving "medical care" when she pulled her friend from a car wreck.

Alexandra Van Horn was in the front passenger seat of a car that slammed into a light pole at 45 mph on Nov. 1, 2004, according to her negligence lawsuit.

Torti was a passenger in a car that was following behind the vehicle and stopped after the crash. Torti said when she came across the wreck she feared the car was going to explode and pulled Van Horn out. Van Horn testified that Torti pulled her out of the wreckage "like a rag doll." Van Horn blamed her friend for her paralysis.

Whether Torti is ultimately liable is still to be determined, but Van Horn's lawsuit can go forward, the Supreme Court ruled.

Beverly Hills lawyer Robert Hutchinson, who represented Van Horn, said he's pleased with the ruling.

Torti's attorney, Ronald Kent, of Los Angeles didn't immediately return a telephone call.

Link to video
http://www.yahoo.com/s/1005222

 

[Jeff7]

"The victim here said, '"I would have been better off if you had not tried to help me, and let some professional come along.'"

If you'd stand there and wait a few minutes for a firefighter or police officer to show up, while the fire incinerated the people inside, you could probably be sued by their families for negligence of some sort.


A lawsuit: It's how we say "thank you" here.

And remember kids, if you see someone in need of help, call your lawyer first.

 

[theflyingpig]

I'm glad that vindictive bitch is a paraplegic. Good for her.

 

[Sentrosi2121]

When Stem-cell research finds a cure for parapalygics they find that they cannot cure her.

I almost wish this on her. Almost.

 

[Bateluer]

Ouch, fine, I won't attempt to help anyone in need in California.

 

[Vette73]

Repost here.


And the court did the right thing. Would you like it if someone beat you as they thought you were being electrocuted yet you were having a seizure? Or how about someone cutting open your kids throat as they saw it on a TV show once, etc? You would be ok with that right? They had good intentions in their mind when they did it.

Sorry but intentions do not clear you of reasonability.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Repost here.


And the court did the right thing. Would you like it if someone beat you as they thought you were being electrocuted yet you were having a seizure? Or how about someone cutting open your kids throat as they saw it on a TV show once, etc? You would be ok with that right? They had good intentions in their mind when they did it.

Sorry but intentions do not clear you of reasonability.

So I suppose you would have left the person in the vehicle. Nice.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Repost here.


And the court did the right thing. Would you like it if someone beat you as they thought you were being electrocuted yet you were having a seizure? Or how about someone cutting open your kids throat as they saw it on a TV show once, etc? You would be ok with that right? They had good intentions in their mind when they did it.

Sorry but intentions do not clear you of reasonability.

So I suppose you would have left the person in the vehicle. Nice.

You mean the car that did not expload and from what I can read was never really on fire. Yes I would have left them in the car. I would have made sure they were sucure and called for help.

 

[CptCrunch]

Wow, I can assume they are no longer friends. What a ridiculous thing to do.

On a side note, I would have done the same thing as the ex-friend. This needs a poll to see what people would have done in this situation.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Repost here.


And the court did the right thing. Would you like it if someone beat you as they thought you were being electrocuted yet you were having a seizure? Or how about someone cutting open your kids throat as they saw it on a TV show once, etc? You would be ok with that right? They had good intentions in their mind when they did it.

Sorry but intentions do not clear you of reasonability.

So I suppose you would have left the person in the vehicle. Nice.

You mean the car that did not expload and from what I can read was never really on fire. Yes I would have left them in the car. I would have made sure they were sucure and called for help.

Yes I'm sure you have the power to see into the future and know that the car would not catch on fire or explode. Wish all people had that super power. Here's a link for you

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Repost here.


And the court did the right thing. Would you like it if someone beat you as they thought you were being electrocuted yet you were having a seizure? Or how about someone cutting open your kids throat as they saw it on a TV show once, etc? You would be ok with that right? They had good intentions in their mind when they did it.

Sorry but intentions do not clear you of reasonability.

So I suppose you would have left the person in the vehicle. Nice.

You mean the car that did not expload and from what I can read was never really on fire. Yes I would have left them in the car. I would have made sure they were sucure and called for help.

Yes I'm sure you have the power to see into the future and know that the car would not catch on fire or explode. Wish all people had that super power. Here's a link for you

What part of the car was not on fire and the only fluid was from the front of the car.
Lets see car has front end damage and I see steam and a liquid coming from the front. OMG!! I must yank this person out now!!!! :roll:

If you ever see a accident please don;t try and "help" as you are to dumb to really help and would just make matters worse i can see.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Repost here.


And the court did the right thing. Would you like it if someone beat you as they thought you were being electrocuted yet you were having a seizure? Or how about someone cutting open your kids throat as they saw it on a TV show once, etc? You would be ok with that right? They had good intentions in their mind when they did it.

Sorry but intentions do not clear you of reasonability.

So I suppose you would have left the person in the vehicle. Nice.

You mean the car that did not expload and from what I can read was never really on fire. Yes I would have left them in the car. I would have made sure they were sucure and called for help.

Yes I'm sure you have the power to see into the future and know that the car would not catch on fire or explode. Wish all people had that super power. Here's a link for you

What part of the car was not on fire and the only fluid was from the front of the car.
Lets see car has front end damage and I see steam and a liquid coming from the front. OMG!! I must yank this person out now!!!! :roll:

If you ever see a accident please don;t try and "help" as you are to dumb to really help and would just make matters worse i can see.

Here you go again link

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: Jeff7
"The victim here said, '"I would have been better off if you had not tried to help me, and let some professional come along.'"

If you'd stand there and wait a few minutes for a firefighter or police officer to show up, while the fire incinerated the people inside, you could probably be sued by their families for negligence of some sort.


A lawsuit: It's how we say "thank you" here.

And remember kids, if you see someone in need of help, call your lawyer first.

"Justice Carlos Moreno wrote for a unanimous court that a person is not obligated to come to someone's aid."

 

[AMCRambler]

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: Jeff7
"The victim here said, '"I would have been better off if you had not tried to help me, and let some professional come along.'"

If you'd stand there and wait a few minutes for a firefighter or police officer to show up, while the fire incinerated the people inside, you could probably be sued by their families for negligence of some sort.


A lawsuit: It's how we say "thank you" here.

And remember kids, if you see someone in need of help, call your lawyer first.

"Justice Carlos Moreno wrote for a unanimous court that a person is not obligated to come to someone's aid."

Yeah but Justice Carlos Moreno won't be standing next to the person that's never heard of him when the next car accident happens.

I don't think I would have moved the person in the vehicle myself. I've had some first aid training in the Boy Scouts and the one thing you learn is that possible back injuries mean don't move the person. I have to say I'm surprised that hitting a pole at 45 was enough to cause a spinal injury severe enough for permanent paralysis. No airbag I guess?

 

[BigToque]

I wish that first aid classes were taught in school. The friend might then have been able to pull this lady from the wreck without injuring her (assuming she wasn't already paralyzed from the accident) and this whole unfortunate situation wouldn't be happening.

 

[LTC8K6]

Why isn't she suing the driver? There is, as usual, more to this story.

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=6498405&page=1

 

[Mermaidman]

Do some of you really not see both sides of the issue?

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Repost here.


And the court did the right thing. Would you like it if someone beat you as they thought you were being electrocuted yet you were having a seizure? Or how about someone cutting open your kids throat as they saw it on a TV show once, etc? You would be ok with that right? They had good intentions in their mind when they did it.

Sorry but intentions do not clear you of reasonability.

:disgust: :clock:

 

[JulesMaximus]

I thought it was common knowledge that you don't move a person after an accident like that.

 

[jonks]

reposted in orig thread

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Mermaidman
Do some of you really not see both sides of the issue?

This is ATOT. Put yer blinders on and pick a side...there is no middle ground, no room for discussion. If you disagree with the heard you must be a communist, tree hugging, hippie worthy of a painful death.

 

[LTC8K6]

I thought it was common knowledge that you don't move a person after an accident like that.

Yes, unless you believe they are in further danger...

My guess is the lawyers checked and decided the driver's pockets were shallower than the friend's...

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6

I thought it was common knowledge that you don't move a person after an accident like that.

Yes, unless you believe they are in further danger...

My guess is the lawyers checked and decided the driver's pockets were shallower than the friend's...

And the friend was qualified to make that decision? It is highly subjective and this woman clearly fucked up.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
Repost here.


And the court did the right thing. Would you like it if someone beat you as they thought you were being electrocuted yet you were having a seizure? Or how about someone cutting open your kids throat as they saw it on a TV show once, etc? You would be ok with that right? They had good intentions in their mind when they did it.

Sorry but intentions do not clear you of reasonability.

So I suppose you would have left the person in the vehicle. Nice.

You mean the car that did not expload and from what I can read was never really on fire. Yes I would have left them in the car. I would have made sure they were sucure and called for help.

Yes I'm sure you have the power to see into the future and know that the car would not catch on fire or explode. Wish all people had that super power. Here's a link for you

What part of the car was not on fire and the only fluid was from the front of the car.
Lets see car has front end damage and I see steam and a liquid coming from the front. OMG!! I must yank this person out now!!!! :roll:

If you ever see a accident please don;t try and "help" as you are to dumb to really help and would just make matters worse i can see.

Here you go again link

And here ya go...

Van Horn v. Watson (Torti, Respondent) (consolidated cases) (S152360)
On Halloween night in 2004, plaintiff Alexandra Van Horn, defendant Lisa Torti,
and some other friends were relaxing at Torti?s home, where both Van Horn and Torti
smoked some marijuana. The friends went to a bar at 10:00 p.m., where they consumed
several drinks before leaving at 1:30 in the morning. On the way home, Van Horn and
Torti were passengers in two different cars. The driver of the car carrying Van Horn lost
control and crashed into a curb and light pole at about 45 miles per hour, causing the
vehicle?s front air bags to deploy. The car carrying Torti pulled over and the occupants
got out to help.
Torti removed Van Horn from the car. There is a dispute about how she did so.
Torti testified that she placed one arm under Van Horn?s legs and the other behind Van
Horn?s back and lifted her out of the vehicle. Torti also testified that she believed the car
might catch fire or ?blow up.? In contrast, Van Horn testified that Torti pulled her from
the vehicle by grabbing her arm and yanking her out ?like a rag doll.? Other witnesses
testified that there was no smoke or any other indication that the car might explode.

That is not hindsight, but a drunk idiot high on weed as well that has watched to many TV shows/Movies.

The person was not in any way in line of danger. This person only made it worse.

 

[Jeeebus]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975
This person only made it worse.

I presume you know this because you are an expert in paralysis that has studied all the medical reports and has examined the lady in the crash?

You were also able to make a credibility determination as to who is lying based entirely on a news article account rather than listening to any testimony or reading any actual statements?

Why is litigation so expensive and why do we need lawyers?? Marlin1975 knows all.