Review Case Study 18-1: EMT Injured by Toxic Fumes – Files Suit Against Chemical Company, found on page 231 in the
textbook (Bennett, L. T. (2008). Fire service law. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall). OR
Kapherr v. MFG Chemical, Inc., No. A06A0184, December 28, 2005.
The full decision is available at
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ga-court-of-appeals/1005355.html
In Kapherr, the Georgia Court of Appeals found that the firemans rule does apply to emergency medical technicians.
Address the argument that Kapherr maintained regarding treating the injured only if the scene had been secured. Do you agree with the courts reasoning in responding to this defense? Explain why, or why not.
Describe a set of circumstances under which it would not be reasonable to consider that the emergency responder has assumed the risk of the hazardous circumstances at the scene. Research and determine the status of the fireman’s rule in Georgia. Identify whether there has been any change to the law since Kapherr. Research and determine the status of the Firemans rule in South Carolina. Has the rule been adopted and enacted into law? Have there been any exceptions enacted into law?
Your response should be at least 300 words in length. You are required to use at least your textbook as source material for your response. All sources used, including the textbook, must be referenced; paraphrased and quoted material must have accompanying citations.
