Good Deed Goes Punished
 

Damn shame

[url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081218/ap_on_re_us/samaritan_protection]Calif. Court: Would-be Good Samaritan can be sued - Yahoo! News[/url]

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

and her friend blames her

I mean I probably wouldn't be happy with life if I ended up a para.. but jesus

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

It sucks, but the decision sounds fair. If Californians want to protect good samaritans who act negligently in coming to the aid of others, the California Legislature should amend the legislation to do so.

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;514502]It sucks, but [B]the decision sounds[/B] [B]fair[/B]. If Californians want to protect good samaritans who act negligently in coming to the aid of others, the California Legislature should amend the legislation to do so.[/quote]
are you kidding me? what happens if the car blows up, and she doesn't save her? she gets sued for not helping? w.t.f is wrong with our judicial system?

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

[quote=dmek25;514535]are you kidding me? what happens if the car blows up, and she doesn't save her? she gets sued for not helping? w.t.f is wrong with our judicial system?[/quote]

The legislative branch of federal and state governments draft and adopt laws. Those laws reflect policy decisions of legislators [B]elected by the people[/B]. Judges swear to uphold all of those laws, regardless of whether they "like" them from a policy standpoint. Good judges are able to set aside their personal preferences and enforce the will of the people as reflected in the law.

Here, the California legislature passed a law which only granted immunity from first responders providing medical assistance. The court determined that the friend did not qualify for immunity under the law which was passed by the [B]state legislature[/B]. As a result, the friend will be liable for money damages if a jury determines (1) that the friend was negligent and (2) the friend deserves to pay for that negligence.

So, your problem isn't with the court's decision, it is with the narrowness of the immunity granted by the legislature for good samaritans. If you have a problem with the decision, take it up with a California state legislator. Alternatively, you can become an anarchist and hope that we get rid of those pesky "laws" which dictate the outcome of cases.

More often than not, criticisms of the justice system are totally unfounded. The criticisms usually amount to attacks on policy choices reflected in laws. Since laws are passed by the people through their representatives in legislatures, criticisms of the justice system usually amount to, "We the people hate laws that we the people helped pass. But, because we hate lawyers, we blame the judges for enforcing the laws we passed."

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;514552]The legislative branch of federal and state governments draft and adopt laws. Those laws reflect policy decisions of legislators [B]elected by the people[/B]. Judges swear to uphold all of those laws, regardless of whether they "like" them from a policy standpoint. Good judges are able to set aside their personal preferences and enforce the will of the people as reflected in the law.

Here, the California legislature passed a law which only granted immunity from first responders providing medical assistance. The court determined that the friend did not qualify for immunity under the law which was passed by the [B]state legislature[/B]. As a result, the friend will be liable for money damages if a jury determines (1) that the friend was negligent and (2) the friend deserves to pay for that negligence.

So, your problem isn't with the court's decision, it is with the narrowness of the immunity granted by the legislature for good samaritans. If you have a problem with the decision, take it up with a California state legislator. Alternatively, you can become an anarchist and hope that we get rid of those pesky "laws" which dictate the outcome of cases.

More often than not, criticisms of the justice system are totally unfounded. The criticisms usually amount to attacks on policy choices reflected in laws. Since laws are passed by the people through their representatives in legislatures, criticisms of the justice system usually amount to, "We the people hate laws that we the people helped pass. But, because we hate lawyers, we blame the judges for enforcing the laws we passed."[/quote]


I generally agree with you, but this case exemplifies why somebody back in England a long time ago started using the word "however". As in, the law states such and such, however...

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

[quote=70Chip;514560]I generally agree with you, but this case exemplifies why somebody back in England a long time ago started using the word "however". As in, the law states such and such, however...[/quote]

I'm not quite sure I follow. Do you mean that the judges should have "legislated from the bench" and expanded the scope of the immunity beyond that provided for in the law? Or, do you mean, that the legislators passed a dumb law?

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

A truly F'd up situation

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

The issue here is with the scumbag plaintiff, not with the court's ruling. You can't legislate decency.

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

[quote=Mattyk72;514620]A truly F'd up situation[/quote]
I agree but this only say's that they can sue and have it go to court.

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

[quote=djnemo65;514788]The issue here is with the scumbag plaintiff, not with the court's ruling. You can't legislate decency.[/quote]

Exactly. That's the shame of it all.

Let me pose this hypothetical. Suppose the legislature passes a law which essentially says, "No one can ever be liable for coming to the aid of another, regardless of whether they acted negligently." Then suppose a little boy's arm gets stuck inside of a soda machine and some nutjob decides he has to "rescue" the boy and get his arm out of the machine. So, said nutjob cuts the boy's arm off and calls 911. A blanket rule providing total immunity for "rescuers" would protect said nutjob from civil liability. Does that sound fair?

Of course not. So, the legislature provided a middle course. Let a jury determine whether a rescuer should have to pay or not.

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

The court's ruling is valid. Obviously the person has standing to file a lawsuit, the challenge is convincing a jury that your friend should have taken more care in saving your shitty life.

As for good samaritans in general, there's a good way and a bad way to do something. I don't suppose to know how this good samaritan conducted herself in her effort to save her life. If she took unnecessary measures I don't see how this case would be different from that doctor who [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,427788,00.html"]cut off a patient's penis[/URL] without asking permission because he detected cancer.

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

Life altering events often bring out the worst in people, that's what I think is the real shame here.

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

More like where there's money there's squirrel trying to get your nut.

Re: Good Deed Goes Punished
 

In my business I see this type of stuff all the time.