Good Samaritan Laws on the Bar Exam
March 13 is Good Samaritan Day, making it the perfect time to tackle a tricky bar exam topic: the standard of care of rescuers.
On the bar exam, questions about aid and liability come down to two key considerations:
1️⃣ Is a Good Samaritan statute mentioned?
2️⃣ Or are we applying the general rule of law?
The General Rule: No Duty to Act, But a Duty to Act Reasonably If You Do
Under generally applicable rules of law, which applies on the Uniform Bar Exam, a person has no legal duty to help someone in distress. In other words, there is no duty to rescue. However, if a person chooses to provide assistance, that person then assumes a duty to act reasonably under the circumstances.
If the person's actions worsen the victim’s condition, that person could be liable for negligence (even though that person had no duty to help in the first place).
Example: A bystander sees an injured person lying on the sidewalk. The bystander decides to move the injured person to a shaded area but then leaves the person unattended for hours, causing the person's condition to deteriorate. Because the bystander voluntarily intervened, the bystander may be liable for failing to act reasonably.
Good Samaritan Statutes: Limited Liability for Helpers
Many states have Good Samaritan statutes designed to encourage people—especially medical professionals—to assist in emergencies without fear of lawsuits.
These laws typically protect medical professionals (like doctors, nurses, sometimes EMTs) who voluntarily render aid from liability for ordinary negligence.
However, there’s a limit—these statutes don't shield helpers from gross negligence or reckless conduct.
Example: A doctor witnesses a car accident and performs CPR on an unconscious driver, accidentally breaking a rib. If a Good Samaritan statute applies, the doctor isn’t liable for this injury unless their actions were grossly negligent or reckless.
Bar Exam Strategy: When to Apply Which Rule?
On the bar exam, the key is to determine which rule applies based on the fact pattern.
If no Good Samaritan statute is mentioned, then apply the general rule.
A person has no duty to help a victim, but if the person does in fact provide help, that person must act reasonably.
If the person abandons or worsens the victim’s condition through negligence, the person could be liable.
If a Good Samaritan statute is mentioned, then analyze its scope:
Ask who is protected? (Usually medical professionals)
Does the law shield them from ordinary negligence? (Typically, yes)
Did their actions rise to gross negligence or recklessness? (If so, they can still be held liable)
