Under their interpretation of the parable, the priest and the Levite got it right.

Being a good Samaritan in California just got a little riskier.

The California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a young woman who pulled a co-worker from a crashed vehicle isn't immune from civil liability because the care she rendered wasn't medical.
The divided high court appeared to signal that rescue efforts are the responsibility of trained professionals. It was also thought to be the first ruling by the court that someone who intervened in an accident in good faith could be sued.

Lisa Torti of Northridge allegedly worsened the injuries suffered by Alexandra Van Horn by yanking her "like a rag doll" from the wrecked car on Topanga Canyon Boulevard.

Torti now faces possible liability for injuries suffered by Van Horn, a fellow department store cosmetician who was rendered a paraplegic in the accident that ended a night of Halloween revelry in 2004.

But in a sharp dissent, three of the seven justices said that by making a distinction between medical care and emergency response, the court was placing "an arbitrary and unreasonable limitation" on protections for those trying to help.

In other words, folks, the prudent rule to follow in California is “LET THAT SUCKER DIE!” After all, the alternative is being saddled with an insurmountable debt if someone decdes your course of action was incorrect – and that someone will always be a lawyer.

Oh, and when this case gets to a jury, hereÂ’s hoping for a bit of jury nullification.

Posted by: Greg at 01:05 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.