Maldonado v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.
629 P.2d 1001, 129 Ariz. 165, 1981 Ariz. App. LEXIS 445 (1981)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An actor who knows or has reason to know that their conduct, whether tortious or innocent, or an instrumentality under their control has caused bodily harm to another person rendering them helpless and in danger of further harm, is under an affirmative duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent that further harm.
Facts:
- On August 11, 1977, Salvador Maldonado, a Mexican citizen, attempted to board a moving freight train owned by Southern Pacific Transportation Company.
- As Maldonado tried to board, four Southern Pacific employees caused the train cars to jerk or bump, causing him to fall under the train's wheels.
- Maldonado's left arm was severed, his left leg was broken, and he suffered other serious, open, and bleeding wounds.
- As the caboose of the train passed, Maldonado, lying helpless on the ground, called for help to two Southern Pacific employees standing on its platform.
- The employees saw Maldonado in his injured state but did nothing to help, and the train continued on without rendering any assistance.
- Shortly thereafter, three other individuals heard Maldonado's screams and came to his aid.
- Southern Pacific employees yelled at these three rescuers in an effort to keep them away from Maldonado.
Procedural Posture:
- Salvador Maldonado filed a five-count complaint against Southern Pacific Transportation Company in an Arizona trial court.
- The complaint included claims for intentional infliction of injury, reckless infliction of injury, interference with a savior (Count III), failure to render aid (Count IV), and failure to call for medical assistance (Count V).
- Southern Pacific filed a motion to dismiss Counts III, IV, and V for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
- The trial court granted Southern Pacific's motion and dismissed those three counts.
- Maldonado, as appellant, appealed the dismissal to the Court of Appeals of Arizona, with Southern Pacific as the appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a party whose instrumentality injures another person, rendering that person helpless, have an affirmative duty to render aid, regardless of whether the party was at fault for the initial injury or whether the injured person was contributorily negligent?
Opinions:
Majority - Howard, Judge
Yes. A party whose instrumentality injures another, making them helpless, has an affirmative duty to render reasonable aid to prevent further harm. The court adopted the position of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 322, which establishes that if an actor's conduct or an instrumentality within their control causes bodily harm to another that leaves them helpless, a duty arises to exercise reasonable care to prevent further harm. This duty is separate and distinct from any liability for the original injury and exists even if the actor's original conduct was innocent or the injured party was contributorily negligent. Citing `Tubbs v. Argus`, the court reasoned that because Maldonado was injured by an instrumentality under Southern Pacific's control—its train—Southern Pacific had a duty to render reasonable aid, and a breach of this duty creates liability for any additional injuries suffered.
Analysis:
This decision formally adopts the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 322 into Arizona law, establishing an affirmative duty to render aid for one who has caused another to be in helpless peril. The ruling is significant because it decouples the duty to aid from the fault for the initial injury, meaning the duty exists even if the actor was not negligent or if the injured party was a trespasser or contributorily negligent. This creates a basis for liability for 'further harm' (e.g., aggravation of injuries due to delayed care) that is distinct from liability for the original accident, expanding tort liability for inaction in specific circumstances.
Unlock the full brief for Maldonado v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.