Patient's Injury Claim Preempted by "Good Samaritan" Law and Policy
by
Joseph C. Maya on May. 03, 2017
Accident & Injury Accident & Injury Personal Injury Lawsuit & Dispute Lawsuit
Summary: Blog post about a plaintiff who tried to bring suit against the first responders that attempted to provide support but was prevented from doing so by a "good samaritan" law.
Contact the personal injury attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C. today. We can help you get the just compensation you deserve for your injuries or those of a loved one. For a free initial consultation, call 203-221-3100 or email JMaya@Mayalaw.com.
Although the record was sparse as to whether an emergency was life-threatening, there was no genuine issue of fact as to whether a firefighter and emergency medical technician rendered emergency first aid to a person in need thereof; therefore, they and their employer were entitled to immunity under the "Good Samaritan" statutes Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-557b(b).
The plaintiff went to a doctor’s office for examination after experiencing a cough, chest pain, and flu-like symptoms for the prior two days. The doctor performed an electrocardiogram (EKG) and took a chest x-ray. The doctor called 911 for an ambulance to transport the plaintiff to Danbury Hospital. Upon arrival, the plaintiff complained of chest pain. An emergency medical technician then inserted an intravenous needle into the plaintiff’s left wrist. The plaintiff alleges that this insertion struck a nerve, causing serious injuries.
The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court found that there is no dispute that the person who inserted the intravenous needles was a firefighter and an emergency medical service provider that had completed first aid courses offered by the American Red Cross. There was also no allegation that their actions go beyond ordinary negligence. The plaintiff argued that the defendants were not protected as within their line of duty, because she was not in an actual emergency at the time the IV was administered. The court declined to accept this argument. “In ordinary parlance, when a doctor’s office calls 911 for a patient after hearing complaints of chest pain and after taking an EKG and chest x-rays, as was the case here, there is certainly an “emergency” said the court. “To allow such a suit would discourage qualified individuals from rendering emergency first aid out of largely altruistic motives, encourage more malpractice suits against these good samaritans, and thereby defeat the legislature’s purpose in enacting the good samaritan statutes.”
At Maya Murphy, P.C., our personal injury attorneys are dedicated to achieving the best results for individuals and their family members and loved ones whose daily lives have been disrupted by injury, whether caused by a motor vehicle or pedestrian accident, a slip and fall, medical malpractice, a defective product, or otherwise. Our attorneys are not afraid to aggressively pursue and litigate cases and have extensive experience litigating personal injury matters in both state and federal courts, and always with regard to the unique circumstances of our client and the injury he or she has sustained.
Source: Lindgren v. Business Sys. Inc., 2005 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3487 (Conn. Super. December 15, 2005)