Articles Posted in Case Analysis

Eight people were killed, and at least 12 injured when an off-road truck participating in the California 200 race veered off the track and plowed into a crowd of spectators. The race was being held in Soggy Dry Lake Bed near Lucerne Valley in the Mojave Desert.

“There was dust everywhere, people screaming, people running,” said photographer David Conklin, who was covering the event for off-road magazines.

It was reported that the truck, a Prerunner, was one of the first off the line in the 200-mile race. The truck had just completed a jump known as “the rockpile” when he lost control, and veered into the crowd, and rolled over. Several victims were trapped under the car, but the driver escaped injury. The driver was, however, forced to flee the scene when angry spectators began to throw rocks at him.

On December 19th, we wrote an article about a poorly decided California Supreme Court decision, Van Horn v. Watson, S152360, which held that California’s Good Samaritan statute, Health & Safety Code § 1799.102, only provided immunity for persons providing emergency medical care at the scene of an accident or other emergency. The Court held that those who render emergency assistance, such as pulling a person from a burning car, are not immune from liability. We feel this was a poor decision by the Supreme Court and agree with the dissenting minority’s position that immunity should be provided to those who render emergency assistance as well.

At least three legislators, from both parties, agree and have introduced proposed legislation which would expand the Good Samaritan statute to provide immunity for those who render emergency assistance, even if the assistance is not medical in nature.

“As a [former] CHP commander, I rolled up on the scene of many accidents and very often people were there rendering help,” said state Sen. John Benoit, R-Palm Desert, who has authored a bill challenging the Van Horn ruling. “We wouldn’t want that type of thing to stop.” Sen. Benoit is seeking to combine his proposed bill with one proposed by Assemblyman Mike Feuer, D-Los Angeles, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee and a former legal aid attorney. Another bill has been proposed by Assemblyman Anthony Adams, R-Hesperia.

FACTS: Last Monday, the passenger of a pick-up truck was ejected from the vehicle when the speeding truck lost control on eastbound Interstate 8 and rolled down an embankment. Rain was likely a factor. The passenger, who was not wearing a seat belt, died in the accident. Walton Law Firm LLP is currently litigating a case that is factually very similar to this one.

LIABILITY ANALYSIS: This type of accident raises several issues related to liability. First, the passenger’s surviving heirs would have a wrongful death case against the driver of the pick-up truck for negligent driving. Since it was a single car accident, it was reportedly traveling 85 mph, and it was raining, the police have probably attributed fault to the driver for operating the vehicle at an unsafe speed in rainy conditions. There may also be a negligent maintenance theory as the tire tread on the vehicle was considered to be lower than the recommended amount.

A wrongful death case, if proven, would entitle the heirs to the loss of love, society, companionship, and support of the victim.

In a narrow 4 to 3 decision, the California Supreme Court has elected to narrow the personal injury immunity provided under the “Good Samaritan” statute, Health & Safety Code § 1799.102. In a poorly decided opinion, Van Horn v. Watson, S152360, a slim majority of the California Supreme Court held that § 1799.102’s immunity provisions apply only to those who render medical care at the scene of a medical emergency despite the plain language of the statute providing no such limitation.

Section 1799.102 provides, in pertinent part, “No person who in good faith, and not for

compensation, renders emergency care at the scene of an emergency shall be liable