Required to stop and render aid (Third party) in accident?

[Doug.38PR]

I was discussing, humorously, over on bayoushooter (Louisiana gun forum) a gun counter story where a guy told me years ago that I was, with a CHL, legally required to stop and render aid at the scene of an accident. I told the gun salesman that "legally I'm suppose to do this anyway if I see an accident" he stated that it carries even more legal weight and responsiblity with a CHL...because, get this, if a LEO is not around YOU are supposed to step in and handle the situation.

Well...needless to say the gun counter guy's comment was sheer nonsense, which my first CHL instructor a few months later told me.

However....CHLs aside, are you, in Texas (in Louisiana apparently it is NOT), required to stop and render aid if you see an accident (you're not IN the accident but you see it). My internet searches seem to say "No." BUT I distinctly remember my driving school instructors (on several occasions in fact) telling us this. Stressing: "You may see an accident and may not care, he may not be kin to you, but the law says you have to stop and help anyway you can." It was even on the written exam I believe.

I know I didn't imagine this. What's the story? (NONE of this is to suggest that I would drive on when somebody is possibly hurt or dying in a wrecked car on the road and needs help, I'm just curious what the law is)

[Keith B]

No, as a private citizen you are under no legal obligation, CHL or not, to stop and render aid. Morally, it is a different story, but legally, no.

[Doug.38PR]

Then why do they teach this in driving school??? ( I'm pretty sure they even pointed i it out in our Texas driving manuels, what statue it was and all that)

[clarionite]

There is no legal requirement. Moral... That depends. And in Louisiana it can open you up to a law suite. Some states have Good Sam laws and some don't. Years ago when I was there, LA didn't.

[WildBill]

Then why do they teach this in driving school??? ( I'm pretty sure they even pointed i it out in our Texas driving manuels, what statue it was and all that)

I think that applies only if you are involved in the accident.

I remember my drivers education teacher "teaching" us about drinking and driving. He stated that one ounce of beer had the same effect as an ounce of whisky. "Alcohol is alcohol. It doesn't matter if it's beer or whisky," were his exact words. Drivers Ed teachers can be just a confused as CHL instructors.

[seamusTX]

Here is the only legal requirement currently in effect in Texas, that I know of:

Transportation Code Sec. 550.021. ACCIDENT INVOLVING PERSONAL INJURY OR DEATH. (a) The operator of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of a person shall:
(1) immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident or as close to the scene as possible;
(2) immediately return to the scene of the accident if the vehicle is not stopped at the scene of the accident; and
(3) remain at the scene of the accident until the operator complies with the requirements of Section 550.023.

Sec. 550.022. ACCIDENT INVOLVING DAMAGE TO VEHICLE. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), the operator of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting only in damage to a vehicle that is driven or attended by a person shall:
(1) immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident or as close as possible to the scene of the accident without obstructing traffic more than is necessary;
(2) immediately return to the scene of the accident if the vehicle is not stopped at the scene of the accident; and
(3) remain at the scene of the accident until the operator complies with the requirements of Section 550.023.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... TN.550.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is one of the rare felony crimes not defined in the penal code

I don't know what the law is in other states or what it may have been years ago. There are many "gun store urban legends" about this kind of thing.

In the case of someone who simply drives past a collision scene with no involvement, from a practical point of view, who is going to know or care? Furthermore, with a typical urban road, if everyone who saw the collision stopped, there would be a monumental traffic jam.

- Jim

[fickman]

If you're not involved in the incident, you can carry on with your day as if nothing happened. Even if you're in the accident, you aren't compelled to help anybody; you're just required to stop. I do believe that off duty first responders are required to lend aid even if they're merely a witness. . . but I'll defer to first responders to answer that.

[jimlongley]

Perhaps this misapprehension is caused by articles such as this:

LUBBOCK, TX (KCBD) - The man police believe is responsible for the tragic hit and run accident Sunday morning is now behind bars, and so is his wife.

Police arrested 23-year-old Zachary Doss at his home around 11:30 Wednesday night and charged him with failure to stop and render aid.

http://www.kcbd.com/story/12355066/man- ... t-arrested" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In this case the person charged with "Failure to stop and render aid" was actually involved in the accident and left the scene, according to police, and I suspect that the charge serves to hold him until they get enough evidence to charge him with more serious stuff, although it seems that many people are actually convicted.

http://www.texastribune.org/library/dat ... r-aid/169/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Texas Statutes - Section 550.021: ACCIDENT INVOLVING PERSONAL INJURY OR DEATH
(a) The operator of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of a person shall:
(1) immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident or as close to the scene as possible;
(2) immediately return to the scene of the accident if the vehicle is not stopped at the scene of the accident; and
(3) remain at the scene of the accident until the operator complies with the requirements of Section 550.023.
(b) An operator of a vehicle required to stop the vehicle by Subsection (a) shall do so without obstructing traffic more than is necessary.
(c) A person commits an offense if the person does not stop or does not comply with the requirements of this section. An offense under this section:
(1) involving an accident resulting in death of or serious bodily injury, as defined by Section 1.07, Penal Code, to a person is a felony of the third degree; and
(2) involving an accident resulting in injury to which Subdivision (1) does not apply is punishable by:
(A) imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for not more than five years or confinement in the county jail for not more than one year;
(B) a fine not to exceed $5,000; or
(C) both the fine and the imprisonment or confinement.
Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.
Amended by:
Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. <a target="new" href="http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/80 ... HTM">97</a>, Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2007.


Sec. 550.023. Duty to Give Information and Render Aid.
The operator of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in the injury or death of a person or damage to a vehicle that is driven or attended by a person shall:
(1) give the operator's name and address, the registration number of the vehicle the operator was driving, and the name of the operator's motor vehicle liability insurer to any person injured or the operator or occupant of or person attending a vehicle involved in the collision;
(2) if requested and available, show the operator's driver's license to a person described by Subdivision (1); and
(3) provide any person injured in the accident reasonable assistance, including transporting or making arrangements for transporting the person to a physician or hospital for medical treatment if it is apparent that treatment is necessary, or if the injured person requests the transportation.
Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

I suspect that anyone who misquotes the preceding as justifying the arrest of persons not involved in the accident, are also guilty of not bothering to read or otherwise pay attention to certain salient portions of 30.06, 46.03, & 46.035.

I was a volunteer fireman in NY state for 17 years and was "protected" from suit by the "Volunteer Fireman's Benefit Act" and NY's "Good Samaritan" laws, and that did not stop someone whose relative died, almost literally in my arms, from trying to sue me for their loved one's death, a death that was not preventable even if she was on the operating table. Actually it was an attorney shotgunning everyone involved, but I still had to go to the expense and inconvenience.

[RPB]

Don't get an understanding of law from the Seinfeld school of law

[youtube]http://youtube.com/watch?v=zPnK0NCn_MQ[/youtube]

[n5wd]

... I do believe that off duty first responders are required to lend aid even if they're merely a witness. . . but I'll defer to first responders to answer that.

Nope - there's no law, DSHS (Dept of State Health Servcies) or EMS Bureau rule or regulation that requires EMS folks in Texas to stop. It's highly encouraged, but not required by any rule of law. And yep, that's another one of the EMS urban legends that's out there, as well as gun-shop stories.

Wayne (28 years as an EMT, EMS-Special Skills, EMT-Paramedic, and finally a Licensed Paramedic)

[C-dub]

... I do believe that off duty first responders are required to lend aid even if they're merely a witness. . . but I'll defer to first responders to answer that.

Nope - there's no law, DSHS (Dept of State Health Servcies) or EMS Bureau rule or regulation that requires EMS folks in Texas to stop. It's highly encouraged, but not required by any rule of law. And yep, that's another one of the EMS urban legends that's out there, as well as gun-shop stories.

Wayne (28 years as an EMT, EMS-Special Skills, EMT-Paramedic, and finally a Licensed Paramedic)

I have also always believed this to be true. However, another belief is that if someone with your credentials or an ER nurse or physician does stop that they CAN be sued contrary to the Good Samaritan laws because of their training and would not be covered by the city's or hospital's insurance because they were not on duty. Maybe this is true and maybe it's not. IDK

[jimlongley]

... I do believe that off duty first responders are required to lend aid even if they're merely a witness. . . but I'll defer to first responders to answer that.

Nope - there's no law, DSHS (Dept of State Health Servcies) or EMS Bureau rule or regulation that requires EMS folks in Texas to stop. It's highly encouraged, but not required by any rule of law. And yep, that's another one of the EMS urban legends that's out there, as well as gun-shop stories.

Wayne (28 years as an EMT, EMS-Special Skills, EMT-Paramedic, and finally a Licensed Paramedic)

I have also always believed this to be true. However, another belief is that if someone with your credentials or an ER nurse or physician does stop that they CAN be sued contrary to the Good Samaritan laws because of their training and would not be covered by the city's or hospital's insurance because they were not on duty. Maybe this is true and maybe it's not. IDK

That was exactly the logic that the attorney was using in attempting to sue me. Didn't work, but it still cost me money.

[n5wd]

... I do believe that off duty first responders are required to lend aid even if they're merely a witness. . . but I'll defer to first responders to answer that.

Nope - there's no law, DSHS (Dept of State Health Servcies) or EMS Bureau rule or regulation that requires EMS folks in Texas to stop. It's highly encouraged, but not required by any rule of law. And yep, that's another one of the EMS urban legends that's out there, as well as gun-shop stories.

Wayne (28 years as an EMT, EMS-Special Skills, EMT-Paramedic, and finally a Licensed Paramedic)

I have also always believed this to be true. However, another belief is that if someone with your credentials or an ER nurse or physician does stop that they CAN be sued contrary to the Good Samaritan laws because of their training and would not be covered by the city's or hospital's insurance because they were not on duty. Maybe this is true and maybe it's not. IDK

Remembering the adage that "any one can be sued for any thing".... to win a suit they'd have to show that I was negligent (i.e. did something that no similarly trained person would ever consider doing) or exceeded the scope of my training and certification/licensure (i.e. cracked a chest with my Swiss Army knife or administered cardiac drugs without a heart monitor going, etc.). In fact, very few EMS personnel ever had any complaints filed (according to the aforementioned EMS Bureau of the State Dept of Health, which became the Department of State Health Services later in life) after stopping in a Good Samaritan-type incident (stopping while you're in your personal vehicle, off duty). And if they DID sue me, my professional liability insurance always had riders covering "Good Sam" type of incidents. Yes, my employer had malpractice insurance that covered me while on duty - but I always bought the individual insurance that covered me if I was working as a vollie somewhere (which I often did), or if I was off-duty.

[n5wd]

That was exactly the logic that the attorney was using in attempting to sue me. Didn't work, but it still cost me money.

Weren't you carrying personal insurance? I never paid more than about $125/year even as a licensed paramedic - I'd assume a nurse's payments might have been a bit more, but not THAT much more to go outside uncovered!