(A) is correct.

Issue: Whether the man breached a duty to the woman by injuring her while saving her life.

Rule: Generally, one has no duty to come to the aid of another person who is in danger absent some special relationship or statutory duty. However, if the defendant starts to rescue: (1) There is a duty of reasonable care; or (2) The defendant is liable if she abandons her efforts. Note that one who, being under no duty to do so, takes charge of another who is helpless to adequately aid or protect himself is subject to liability to the other for any bodily harm caused to him by: (1) the failure of the actor to exercise reasonable care to secure the safety of the other while within the actor’s charge, or  (2) the actor’s discontinuing his aid or protection, if by doing so he leaves the other in a worse position than when the actor took charge of him. [Restatement (Second) of Torts § 324.] Case law  generally  finds  any  abandonment  by  the  rescuer  will  leave  the  plaintiff  in a worse position.

Analysis: Here, the man owed a duty of reasonable care to the elderly woman once he decided to rescue her. That he ultimately saved her life will not shield him from liability if he failed to act reasonably during the  rescue. The facts  state  that  he  “violently”  pushed  the  woman  to  the  ground. This  is  almost  definitely  unreasonable  – the  man  could  have  just  grabbed  her  arm or shouted at her to stop. As such, the woman will likely prevail against the man.

(A) is correct because even though the man rescued the woman, he still had a duty to perform the rescue with reasonable care.  His failure to do so will render him liable to the plaintiff.

(B) is incorrect because while it is true the man had no duty to act, there is no reason that he should not have acted; the law will not punish a rescuer who acts without a duty to act, unless the rescuer acted unreasonably in performing the rescue.

(C) is incorrect because even though he saved the woman’s life, he could have done so without injuring her. The law imposes a duty to always act reasonably. The man is not immune from the duty to act reasonably because he chose to act when he did not have to act, and even if he did save the woman’s life, he still is liable for acting unreasonably.

(D) is incorrect because even if the woman put herself in peril, the man assumed a duty of care to act reasonably when he decided to rescue her.

 

Remember we’re here to help!