-- Posted by jamesish at 8:28 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081218/ap_on_re_us/samaritan_protection There's the story.   Basically, a woman pulled a co-worker out of the car after she thought it was about to catch on fire and ended up paralyzing her. I really don't know what to think about it.  On one hand, this woman must of been rough as hell.  Geez.  If she was THAT reckless, then by all means sue her.  On the other hand, she was being a good Samaritan. She said, "She would of rather the woman left her in the car."  Wtf?  If she suffered 3rd degree burns or something, she would be suing her for that. If that car would of blown up and she didn't get her out of the car, she would of been sued for something.  Damn if you do, damn if you don't. I'm not really sure how it is outside of the states but here you can't walk outside without getting yourself in a situation that you might get sued. It's a shame. Take this for example:  http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2008/0404081google1.html Suing Google for invasion of privacy because of "street view." -- Posted by UltimaTaz at 8:28 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 The Incredible much? -- Posted by Clara Bell at 8:28 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 The Good Samaritan law should protect him. -- Posted by HopeAndWisdom at 8:29 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 I think that is just silly he was trying to help her. -- Posted by Moatilliata at 8:29 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 catch 22. that's why everyone's becoming apathetic these days. -- Posted by ArrestedAndCharged at 8:29 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 I'd sue him too. Fuck, I mean he was trying to help her, sure, but if he did it in a way that caused her to become parapalegic, that's just fucked up. -- Posted by Event Horizon at 8:30 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 Actually, you can't get in trouble for not doing anything. The law sucks. It's a difficult case though, if the car wasn't actually on fire he could wind up losing -which is just ridiculous in my opinion. -- Posted by jamesish at 8:30 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 Quote: from peace love sunshine at 11:28 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 The Good Samaritan law should protect him. 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. That was in the article. -- Posted by rawr41507 at 8:30 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 wow -- Posted by OverTheAir at 8:30 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 You still have to give consent under the good Samaritan law, no? Unless the person is unconscious, then it's implied consent. -- Posted by GaelicFreak at 8:31 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 Quote: from peace love sunshine at 11:28 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 The Good Samaritan law should protect him. Supreme Court is letting her sue him. I say it's bullshit. He had her best interests at heart. -- Posted by Shibs at 8:31 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 Geeze... Remind me not to save anyone's life... -- Posted by MiNNiCK at 8:33 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 Weird -- Posted by jamesish at 8:33 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 Quote: from OverTheAir at 11:30 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 You still have to give consent under the good Samaritan law, no? Unless the person is unconscious, then it's implied consent. I believe that's true.  If you reach out your hand, you're giving consent and the Samaritan law comes in. "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." I'm think this woman is in deep anyway. -- Posted by dragonking at 8:34 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 It's one of the MANY EVILS of capitalism...  If she was killed by the fire she would't have been able to sue anyone.  Well, I feel sorry for him to be sued and her to be so mean.  It's tough though.  Being paralyzed would probably mean she can't work to support herself anymore. -- Posted by OverTheAir at 8:35 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 Such bullshit. Poor guy. -- Posted by jamesish at 8:38 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 Quote: from dragonking at 11:34 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 It's one of the MANY EVILS of capitalism... If she was killed by the fire she would't have been able to sue anyone. Her family would.  Believe that. And she will probably get some kind of funding.  I'm not sure how it is in California. -- Posted by davjs at 8:38 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 I saw this story on digg I think. Amazingly sad. -- Posted by jamesish at 8:42 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 Quote: from davjs at 11:38 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 I saw this story on digg I think. Amazingly sad. That it is.  I honestly don't know if I could help someone after reading things like this. -- Posted by Trendz at 9:07 pm on Dec. 20, 2008 yeah i heard about that. how ungrateful... -- Posted by smartlake at 11:53 am on Dec. 29, 2008 Perhaps she was rough with her friend, and maybe the paralyzed woman might have survived without her help, but allowing her to sue would open up a whole new can of worms with the good Samaritan law.  The law is a good one. Just FYI: both people in question were females. -- Posted by jamesish at 1:18 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from smartlake at 2:53 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Perhaps she was rough with her friend, and maybe the paralyzed woman might have survived without her help, but allowing her to sue would open up a whole new can of worms with the good Samaritan law. The law is a good one. Just FYI: both people in question were females. The topic was edited like a while ago. -- Posted by smartlake at 3:13 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 1:18 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from smartlake at 2:53 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Perhaps she was rough with her friend, and maybe the paralyzed woman might have survived without her help, but allowing her to sue would open up a whole new can of worms with the good Samaritan law.  The law is a good one. Just FYI: both people in question were females. The topic was edited like a while ago. I was talking about all the replies made by people, evidently everyone thought the rescuer was a man (or something like that...) -- Posted by jamesish at 4:04 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from smartlake at 6:13 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 1:18 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from smartlake at 2:53 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Perhaps she was rough with her friend, and maybe the paralyzed woman might have survived without her help, but allowing her to sue would open up a whole new can of worms with the good Samaritan law. The law is a good one. Just FYI: both people in question were females.    The topic was edited like a while ago. I was talking about all the replies made by people, evidently everyone thought the rescuer was a man (or something like that...) "but allowing her to sue would open up a whole new can of worms with the good Samaritan law.  The law is a good one." It's obviously not good enough.  It doesn't apply here. -- Posted by smartlake at 12:11 am on Dec. 30, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 4:04 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from smartlake at 6:13 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 1:18 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from smartlake at 2:53 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Perhaps she was rough with her friend, and maybe the paralyzed woman might have survived without her help, but allowing her to sue would open up a whole new can of worms with the good Samaritan law.  The law is a good one. Just FYI: both people in question were females.   The topic was edited like a while ago.    I was talking about all the replies made by people, evidently everyone thought the rescuer was a man (or something like that...) "but allowing her to sue would open up a whole new can of worms with the good Samaritan law. The law is a good one." It's obviously not good enough. It doesn't apply here. I meant that I thought it was a good law.   -- Posted by jamesish at 4:21 pm on Dec. 30, 2008 Quote: from smartlake at 3:11 am on Dec. 30, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 4:04 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from smartlake at 6:13 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 1:18 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Quote: from smartlake at 2:53 pm on Dec. 29, 2008 Perhaps she was rough with her friend, and maybe the paralyzed woman might have survived without her help, but allowing her to sue would open up a whole new can of worms with the good Samaritan law. The law is a good one. Just FYI: both people in question were females.       The topic was edited like a while ago.   I was talking about all the replies made by people, evidently everyone thought the rescuer was a man (or something like that...)    "but allowing her to sue would open up a whole new can of worms with the good Samaritan law.  The law is a good one."    It's obviously not good enough.  It doesn't apply here.     I meant that I thought it was a good law. It's just not.  But we all have our opinions. -- Posted by scalywag66 at 3:19 pm on Jan. 1, 2009 For all we know the car wreck paralyzed her and she didnt notice or recognize until she was out of the vehicle, or however it went down.