Minnich v. Med-Waste, Inc.
564 S.E.2d 98, 349 S.C. 567 (2002)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
South Carolina law does not recognize the firefighter's rule. Therefore, an emergency professional injured in the line of duty is not barred from recovering tort-based damages from a negligent third party whose actions caused the injury.
Facts:
- Jeffrey Minnich was employed by the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) as a public safety officer.
- While on duty, Minnich was assisting in loading medical waste onto a tractor-trailer truck owned by Med-Waste, Inc.
- Minnich noticed the unoccupied truck begin to roll forward, heading toward a public street.
- He ran to the truck, jumped inside, and stopped it from rolling further.
- Minnich alleges that in the process of stopping the truck, he suffered serious injuries proximately caused by the negligence of Med-Waste's employees.
Procedural Posture:
- Jeffrey Minnich filed a tort action against Med-Waste, Inc. in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina.
- Med-Waste asserted the firefighter's rule as an affirmative defense to bar Minnich's claim.
- Finding no controlling precedent from the state's highest court on the issue, the U.S. District Court certified a question of law to the Supreme Court of South Carolina.
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 the Firefighter’s Rule bar an emergency professional, such as a firefighter, police officer, or public safety officer, who is injured as a result of performing his or her duties, from recovering tort-based damages from the party whose negligence caused the injury?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Pleicones
No. The Firefighter's Rule does not bar an emergency professional from recovering tort-based damages from a negligent third party. The court declined to adopt the rule, finding it is not part of South Carolina's common law. After examining the various rationales for the rule in other jurisdictions—such as premises liability, assumption of risk, and public policy—the court found none of them persuasive. It noted that the rule is inconsistently applied across states, is 'riddled with exceptions,' and has been modified or abolished by many state legislatures. The court concluded that the 'more sound public policy' is to not single out police officers and firefighters for discriminatory treatment and to instead rely on the state's existing tort law to handle such claims.
Analysis:
This decision definitively establishes that South Carolina has affirmatively rejected the firefighter's rule, preventing it from becoming part of the state's jurisprudence. By doing so, the court aligns South Carolina with a modern legal trend away from the traditional common law doctrine that immunized negligent parties from liability for injuries to first responders. This ruling clarifies that public safety officers in South Carolina have the same right as other citizens to sue third parties for negligence causing on-the-job injuries, and future cases will be analyzed under standard principles of duty, breach, causation, and damages.
Unlock the full brief for Minnich v. Med-Waste, Inc.