Rescue doctrine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please discuss this issue on the talk page or replace this tag with a more specific message. This article has been tagged since December 2005. |
 |
| Tort law II |
|---|
| Part of the common law series |
| Negligent torts |
| Negligence · Negligent hiring |
| Negligent entrustment · Malpractice |
| Negligent infliction of emotional distress |
| Doctrines affecting liability |
| Duty of care · Standard of care |
| Proximate cause · Res ipsa loquitur |
| Calculus of negligence · Eggshell skull |
| Vicarious liability · Attractive nuisance |
| Rescue doctrine · Duty to rescue |
| Comparative responsibility |
| Duties owed to visitors to property |
| Trespassers · Licensees · Invitees |
| Defenses to negligence |
| Contributory negligence |
| Last clear chance |
| Comparative negligence |
| Assumption of risk · Intervening cause |
| Strict liability |
| Ultrahazardous activity |
| Product liability |
| Nuisance |
| Other areas of the common law |
| Contract law · Property law |
| Wills and trusts |
| Criminal law · Evidence |
The rescue doctrine of the law of torts holds that if a tortfeasor creates a circumstance that places the tort victim in danger, the tortfeasor is liable not only for the harm caused to the victim, but also the harm caused to any person injured in an effort to rescue that victim. This doctrine was originally created in case law by Wagner v. International Railway, 232 N.Y. 176 (1926), in which Justice Cardozo stated "Danger invites rescue...The wrongdoer may not have foreseen the coming of a deliverer. He is accountable as if he had."
Essentially it means that the rescuer can recover for damages from a defendant when they are injured rescuing someone. The defendant is usually negligent in causing the accident to occur. Other cases have occurred where the plaintiff is injured rescuing the defendant and is able to collect damages.
In Wagner v. International Railway, riders on defendant's trains were allowed to walk between cars while the train was moving. In one incident, a rider fell through the cars. Plaintiff, trying to help the fallen rider, was injured himself. The court found the defendant liable because of negligence to allow riders to walk between cars while the train was moving.
Essentially, in its pure form the Rescue Doctrine boils down to 4 main elements - all of which must be met in order to bring it to bear for the person asserting its privelege.
1) There must be peril or the appearance of peril to a third party, caused by the defendant.
2) That peril or appearance of peril must be imminent
3) A reasonable person would recognize the peril or appearance of peril and the plaintiff must also have actually recognized it.
4) The plaintiff must have exercised reasonable care in effecting the rescue
