Analysis of relevant cases involving the Good Samaritan Act Doctrine: Its implication to the immunity of people who helped during an emergency

Abstract

The study was primarily conducted to study relevant cases involving the Good Samaritan Act Doctrine and its implication to the immunity of people who helped during an emergency. The study aimed to gather information about relevant cases involving the doctrine, to understand the implication of the doctrine on the immunity of people who helped during an emergency, and to compare relevant cases involving the doctrine. Using information from legal sources, official publications, and related studies, the data gathered were analyzed in order to determine the applicability of the Good Samaritan Law of a state on a healthcare professional, and the rationale of the court in applying or rejecting the Good Samaritan Act Doctrine. The study found out that each state in the United States of America has its own version of the Good Samaritan Law, and each law varies as to its applicability. In some states, the law applies to any person in general, while on others, healthcare professionals are separated in another law. Although the Good Samaritan Law of each state varies, the law affords protection to healthcare professionals who are acting in good faith, without compensation, and performed the act without gross negligence. The rationale of the doctrine is to encourage the participation of bystanders in times of emergencies by providing them with immunity from civil liability in case injuries were inflicted during the course of the rescue or the attempt the rescue. The study also found out that there is no Good Samaritan Law in the Philippines, although there are a few provisions in existing laws that are akin to the Good Samaritan Laws of the United States of America.