voluntary rescue doctrine in Washington

2024Also significant here, the Court in Norg cited both Folsom and Brown—two cases that squarely address the voluntary rescue doctrine—in concluding, “a common law duty of reasonable care ‘arises when one party voluntarily begins to assist an individual needing help.’” Id. at 763 (quoting Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 674-75 , and citing Brown, 86 Wn.2d at 299 ).

2024Much the same applies to the City’s argument that “[c]onsistent with the Restatement, Washington courts have applied the voluntary rescue doctrine as both a source of, and a limitation on, liability in negligence claims.” In Folsom, cited by the City in support of this argument, our Supreme Court stated: Typically, liability for attempting a voluntary rescue has been found when the defendant makes the plaintiff’s situation worse by: (1) increasing the danger; (2) misleading the plaintiff into believing the danger had been removed; or (3) depriving the plaintiff of the possibility of help from

2000In Folsom v. Burger King, 135 Wash.2d 658 , 958 P.2d 301 (1998), the plaintiffs also sought, this time unsuccessfully, to impose liability on a defendant under the voluntary rescue doctrine.

2000In Folsom v. Burger King, 135 Wn.2d 658 , 958 P.2d 301 (1998), the plaintiffs also sought, this time unsuccessfully, to impose liability on a defendant under the voluntary rescue doctrine.

2024Also significant here, the Court in Norg cited both Folsom and Brown—two cases that squarely address the voluntary rescue doctrine—in concluding, “a common law duty of reasonable care ‘arises when one party voluntarily begins to assist an individual needing help.’” Id. at 763 (quoting Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 674-75 , and citing Brown, 86 Wn.2d at 299 ).

2021For example, in Brown v. MacPherson’s, Inc., 86 Wn.2d 293 , 545 P.2d 13 (1975), we analyzed the voluntary rescue doctrine in the context of a State agent’s representations relating to the risk of avalanche.

2014Osborn v. Mason County, 157 Wn.2d 18, 25-26 , 134 P.3d 197 (2006); Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 675-77 ; Chambers-Castanes v. King County, 100 Wn.2d 275 , 285 n.3, 669 P.2d 451 (1983);Brown v. MacPherson’s, Inc., 86 Wn.2d 293, 300-01 , 545 P.2d 13 (1975); see Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 323(b), 324A(c) (1965); Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm §§ 42(b), 43(c) (2012). ¶18 The person in need may reasonably rely on the promise if it induces him or her to “refrain from seeking help elsewhere.” Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 676 ; Brown, 86 Wn.2d at 300 .

2014Osborn v. Mason County, 157 Wn.2d 18, 25-26 , 134 P.3d 197 (2006); Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 675-77 ; Chambers-Castanes v. King County, 100 Wn.2d 275 , 285 n.3, 669 P.2d 451 (1983);Brown v. MacPherson’s, Inc., 86 Wn.2d 293, 300-01 , 545 P.2d 13 (1975); see Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 323(b), 324A(c) (1965); Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm §§ 42(b), 43(c) (2012). ¶18 The person in need may reasonably rely on the promise if it induces him or her to “refrain from seeking help elsewhere.” Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 676 ; Brown, 86 Wn.2d at 300 .

2014Osborn v. Mason County, 157 Wn.2d 18, 25-26 , 134 P.3d 197 (2006); Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 675-77 ; Chambers-Castanes v. King County, 100 Wn.2d 275 , 285 n.3, 669 P.2d 451 (1983);Brown v. MacPherson’s, Inc., 86 Wn.2d 293, 300-01 , 545 P.2d 13 (1975); see Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 323(b), 324A(c) (1965); Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm §§ 42(b), 43(c) (2012). ¶18 The person in need may reasonably rely on the promise if it induces him or her to “refrain from seeking help elsewhere.” Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 676 ; Brown, 86 Wn.2d at 300 .

2014Osborn v. Mason County, 157 Wn.2d 18,25-26 , 134 P.3d 197 (2006); Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 675-77 ; Chambers-Castane"s v. King County, 100 Wn.2d 275 , 285 n.3, 669 P.2d 451 (1983); Brown v. MacPherson's, Inc., 86 Wn.2d 293, 300-01 , 545 P.2d 13 (1975); see RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS §§ 323(b), 324A(c) (1965); RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF TORTS: LIABILITY FOR PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL HARM §§ 42(b), 43(c) (2012).

2014Osborn v. Mason County, 157 Wn.2d 18, 25-26 , 134 P.3d 197 (2006); Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 675-77 ; Chambers-Castanes v. King County, 100 Wn.2d 275 , 285 n.3, 669 P.2d 451 (1983);Brown v. MacPherson’s, Inc., 86 Wn.2d 293, 300-01 , 545 P.2d 13 (1975); see Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 323(b), 324A(c) (1965); Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm §§ 42(b), 43(c) (2012). ¶18 The person in need may reasonably rely on the promise if it induces him or her to “refrain from seeking help elsewhere.” Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 676 ; Brown, 86 Wn.2d at 300 .

2014Osborn v. Mason County, 157 Wn.2d 18,25-26 , 134 P.3d 197 (2006); Folsom, 135 Wn.2d at 675-77 ; Chambers-Castane"s v. King County, 100 Wn.2d 275 , 285 n.3, 669 P.2d 451 (1983); Brown v. MacPherson's, Inc., 86 Wn.2d 293, 300-01 , 545 P.2d 13 (1975); see RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS §§ 323(b), 324A(c) (1965); RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF TORTS: LIABILITY FOR PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL HARM §§ 42(b), 43(c) (2012).

2003Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 323, 324A (1965); French v. Chase, 48 Wn.2d 825, 829-30 , 297 P.2d 235 (1956).

2003Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 323, 324A (1965); French v. Chase, 48 Wn.2d 825, 829-30 , 297 P.2d 235 (1956).

2024“On appeal -3- No. 86762-8-I of summary judgment, the standard of review is de novo, and the appellate court performs the same inquiry as the trial court.” Lybbert v. Grant County, 141 Wn.2d 29, 34 , 1 P.3d 1124 (2000).

2024“On appeal -3- No. 86762-8-I of summary judgment, the standard of review is de novo, and the appellate court performs the same inquiry as the trial court.” Lybbert v. Grant County, 141 Wn.2d 29, 34 , 1 P.3d 1124 (2000).

2024Lutheran Day Care, 119 Wn.2d at 113 .

2015If the defendant is aware of a potential danger and acts to aid the plaintiff, then the defendant “may be liable for attempting a voluntary rescue and making the plaintiff’s situation worse if that [defendant] (1) increases the danger, (2) misleads the plaintiff into believing the danger has been removed, or (3) deprives the plaintiff of possible help from others.” Ganno v. Lanoga Corp., 119 Wn.