What is Failure to Render Aid?
To "fail to render aid" in the context of this law, means to not render aid or assistance to another person whom you know is in "grave physical harm or peril." This law may be contravened by both inaction and by speech. For example, while driving in a car, if you see another driver slide off the road and crash into a ditch or a tree, and you do not stop to help, you may be found to have violated this law. If you decide to call the police from your car and tell them that someone slid off the road and may need help but you do not inform them as to where they are because you are unsure, you may be found to have violated this law.
California Civil Code Section 1714 specifically defines what constitutes the failure to render aid. It states: "every one is responsible, not only for an injury occasioned to another by his or her lack of ordinary care or skill in the management of his or her property, but also for an injury occasioned to another by his or her reckless or want of ordinary care in the management of his or her person, except so far as the latter has, willfully or by a wanton disregard of consequences, brought the injury upon himself or herself." The statute does not define the phrase "willful or wanton disregard of consequences," but it is generally held to mean being indifferent to the possible results or ensuing injury to another. An example of this could be playing with fireworks in strong winds and near fire prone vegetation. Failure to keep the fireworks controlled and properly used could be a willful and wanton disregard of consequences that may lead to liability for injuries cause by the ensuing fire . California Civil Code Section 1714 also describes when an affirmative act of advice can create liability for the "failure to render aid" law. In this section it states that every one is responsible not only for an injury occasioned to another by his or her reckless or want of ordinary care in the management of his or her person, but also for an injury occasioned to another by an affirmative act of advice or intervention which affirmatively increases the risk to such other person. A "failure to render aid" can be committed by both action and inaction. If you encourage someone to do something unsafe, knowing that they are likely to do it, then you have acted affirmatively to put that person at risk. In general, you can be held liable if you enter a situation when there would not have been harm but for your entry and you failed to take steps to alleviate the resultant harm. Another example of when you can be found liable for the "failure to render aid" law is when you assist someone in danger knowing that your assistance is likely to increase their risk of harm or render them subject to greater dangers. In Hughes v. California Palace Hotel (1910) 158 CA 80, the Plaintiff was a John Doe that was the only occupant of his room in a hotel. A few days prior to the incident, he had removed the gas mantels and put them in his closet. During the night the gas lights in a hallway caused the gas to come into the room through the ventilators and then explode. Hughes was held to be liable for "failure to render aid" because they had failed to require the guest to store his goods and property in a safe manner or to take steps to render the gas lights safe.
The Legal Duty to Render Aid
Under American tort law, there is no general legal duty to rescue or render aid to a person in need. Only in specially defined relationships is there such a duty. Oregon is unique in that it is the only state that enacts a "Good Samaritan" law that imposes such a duty on every person. See ORS 30.800. Under this statute, a person providing aid to the injured or ill at the scene of an emergency has immunity from civil liability for any ordinary negligence resulting in harm to the person rendered aid. The statute defines "person" to include corporations and excludes those "operating an ambulance service or employed by an ambulance service on the date of providing services at the scene of an emergency." In addition, "injured or ill person" is defined as one who is unconscious, ill, or otherwise mentally or physically incapable of giving consent to render such aid.
The "Good Samaritan" exception does not apply to the operator of a motor vehicle who leaves the scene and does not attempt to provide aid to a person injured in the accident. Emergency medical services, police, and firefighters are specifically excluded. Only persons who voluntarily intervene are protected by the law. A person’s mere presence at the scene of an emergency situation or his/her provision of emotional support does not trigger the statute. Otherwise, however, immunity under Oregon law extends to doctors, nurses, and laypersons who reasonably and in good faith attempt to render aid.
Many other jurisdictions have enacted "Good Samaritan" laws that impose certain duties on laypersons and grant immunity from civil liability if they render aid to a person in need. Missouri Revised Statutes Section 537.760 (2) provides:
Any person, institution, or corporation licensed or certified under the provisions of chapters 344, 371, 376, 379, or 381, RSMo. or any employee thereof, who in good faith and without expectation of monetary compensation acts in any emergency involving an accident or disaster to render emergency care to a person shall not be liable for any civil damages for any act or omission except for willful or wanton acts or omissions. Such a person shall be deemed to have sufficient direct connection or nexus with such act or omission, considering the facts of the particular situation in which such damages were sustained, to make such a claim subject to contribution proceedings between such person or persons so rendering such aid and the person or persons alleged to have sustained such damages.
The statutes of California and Florida also grant limited immunity from liability when a person provides aid at the scene of an emergency. California Civil Code Section 1799.102(a) provides:
There is no liability on the part of and no cause of action of any nature shall arise against those persons attempting to render emergency care, unless it can be shown that they acted with willful or wanton disregard for the safety of others.
Florida Statutes 768.13 provides:
Any person . . . who gratuitously and in good faith renders emergency care at the scene of an emergency . . . is immune from civil liability for any act, omission to act, or service rendered during and as a result of such care.
Penalties for Failure to Render Aid
Failure to render aid constitutes a criminal offense in most jurisdictions. Law enforcement may issue a citation, place the offender under arrest and file charges, or may take no action and instead refer the incident to the proper authorities, such as social services. In cases where an at-fault driver flees the scene of an accident, the responsible party faces criminal prosecution. Otherwise, the legal consequences of failure to render aid resemble those of failure to exchange information.
In addition to fines and possible incarceration, a conviction for failure to render aid may include restitution payments to the victim (e.g., an uninsured motorist). Fines may vary depending on the local laws and the severity of the crime, but a misdemeanor may result in fines ranging from $1,000 to $5,000.
Civilly, the victim of the crime may pursue damages against the at-fault party. Pursuant to the law, the person(s) injured by a failure to render aid can file a civil lawsuit to recover costs for medical expenses, loss of earnings, damage to their automobile, pain and suffering, and emotional distress. A court may also award punitive damages of up to three times the damages awarded.
Exceptions to the Obligation
Section exceptions to the rule
Despite the generally well-established duty of individuals to render aid in the event of an accident, there are exceptions to the rule. Where assistance would result in greater danger to the rescuer, the obligation to render assistance may diminish. The U.S. Supreme Court has noted "Good Samaritan" immunity from liability unless rescuers act negligently. Generally, courts will expect responders to act as reasonably prudent persons would, but will not expect them to put themselves in jeopardy in so doing. For example, in one case, a rescuer was not liable for injury caused in his attempt to rescue a drowning boy, where the resuscitation attempt had been almost immediately impeded by a crowd of onlookers.
In some specified situations, a legal defense to a failure to render aid may be available . Where reasonable assistance is being given at the scene of an accident, the "Good Samaritan" defense may be used by the rescuer or responder. Further, for much of the last century, various states adopted a policy that that the state not be held liable for the negligence of first responders. Because that approach did not adequately protect the rights of victims, many states have repealed that immunity, while other states still provide a form of immunity for responders. Implied consent from an injured victim may be found where a reasonable person would understand the need for assistance by medical professionals, such as in the case of sudden illness in public places. It is important to understand the law that applies in your jurisdiction, as minimum standards for conduct or liability may vary from state to state.
Examples, Cases, and Scenarios
A notable case involved Dirk Fischer, a 70-year-old German citizen who was charged in the United States for failing to render aid to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer. According to court documents, Fischer was ordered to come to a stop while driving his motor home at the Sumas Port of Entry in Washington State. However, rather than heeding the command, he allegedly pressed the gas and struck the officer, who was on foot. Prosecutors said he "failed to stop" even after the officer "emphatically indicated" that he needed to do so. The officer was hit with a "considerable force" and suffered severe injury. The driver continued fleeing the scene of the "major car accident" despite the serious consequences. Fortunately, U.S. border officials were able to stop and arrest the man. He was charged with three misdemeanors, all stemming from the incident. "Drivers are not allowed to flee the scene of a traffic collision," said U.S. Attorney Annette L. Hayes in a statement. "In this case the driver ignored the warning and serious injuries resulted. It matters little that the port facility is at an international border and the victim is an officer. All drivers must take responsibility for their conduct while behind the wheel." The man eventually pleaded guilty to all three counts and was fined nearly $3,000 in addition to serving three years on probation. This case is an excellent example of how failure to render aid crimes can result in significant legal penalties.
How to Prevent Legal Liability
Failure to Render Aid laws do have some exceptions, including "Good Samaritan" laws which protect those who voluntarily come to the aid of an injured individual. However, Good Samaritan protections are not automatic, nor are they universal. If you choose to come to the aid of someone in need , here are a few tips that will help you avoid running afoul of failure to render aid laws:
- Make sure you have a good faith belief that you can help. Don’t let that person flounder and drown because you’re worried about getting into trouble. But don’t play the hero if you don’t have reason to believe you can do any good.
- Remember that application of these laws is complicated. There are far too many details for an injured party to sift through to decide if you really owe them assistance. The best thing you can do is make sure you are truly helping.
- Know how long you are expected to offer assistance. Sometimes the law makes allowances for parents and other people who would reasonably be around to assist a person for a longer than usual period of time.
- Call for help. If you are not able to provide direct assistance, you should at least try to get help for the person in need.
A good rule of thumb to remember is: before you dive into a situation, make sure you understand both the risk and scope of your responsibility.