Eastburn

Eastburn v. Regional Fire Protection Authority

Bad Law
2003 Cal. LEXIS 9582·2003 Daily Journal DAR 13770·31 Cal. 4th 1175·7 Cal. Rptr. 3d 552·80 P.3d 656
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 18, 2003S107792California3,505 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chin, J.

In California, public agencies each year receive millions of 911 dispatch calls seeking emergency, medical, and fire services. (E.g., Sen. Com. on Energy and Public Utilities and Joint Com. on Fire, Police, Emergency and Disaster Services (Nov. 21, 1990) Joint Interim Hearing on the 911 Emergency Response System—An Overview of Its Effectiveness, pp. 11 [Cal. Highway Patrol], 18 [Los Angeles Police Dept.], 23 [Los Angeles County], 25 [Los Angeles Fire Dept.].) In this case, we must decide whether public entities employing emergency dispatchers are subject to direct or vicarious tort liability for injury attributable in part to a dispatcher’s failure or delay in responding to a 911 call. We conclude that, based on applicable statutory provisions and the legislative policies underlying them, no statute imposes direct liability on public entities in such situations (see Gov. Code, §§ 815, 815.6 [direct liability for breach of statutory mandatory duty]), and vicarious liability (see Gov. Code, §§ 815.2, subd. (a), 820) is limited to cases involving gross negligence or bad faith (Health & Saf. Code, § 1799.107 (hereafter section 1799.107)). Plaintiffs have failed to plead facts…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.