Caps & Immunities
Statutory and Common Law Immunity for Emergency Vehicles in 2010
Bruce M. Bender O
n many occasions, police officers, who are operating their police vehicle in an emergency situation get involved in a motor vehicle accident causing others
serious bodily harm. Generally, if the officers are authorized to operate an emergency vehicle and are actually performing emergency services at the time, they are immune from a suit for negligence only but not gross negligence. Te Court of Appeals in two different decisions in the past year, Schreyer v. Chaplain, 416 Md. 94, 5 A.3d 1054 (2010) and Prince George's County v. Brent, 414 Md. 334, 995 A.2d 672 (2010) has reviewed when police officers are entitled to statutory and common law immunity as a matter of law under the applicable statutes and common law.
In both cases, the
Court of Appeals upheld lower court decisions for the injured plaintiff and interpreted statutory and common law immunity defenses raised by the defendants very narrowly.
A. The Statutory Immunity Defense Te statutory immunity defense for operators of
emergency vehicles arises from Section 5-639(b) of the Court and Judicial Proceedings Article.1 in pertinent part:
Said section states
Negligent operation of emergency vehicle b. Liability of operator. 1. An operator of an emergency vehicle, who is authorized to operate the emergency vehicle by its owner or lessee, is immune from suit in the operator's individual capacity for damages
1 Similarly, operators of fire and rescue vehicles are also granted immunity for any negligent act or omission in the performance of their duties; however, willful or grossly negligent acts are not allowed immunity. Maryland Code, Courts Article, 5-604(a) (1973, 2006 Repl. Vol.)
resulting
from a
negligent
act or omission
while operating the emergency vehicle in the performance of emergency service.
2. Tis subsection does not provide immunity from suit to an operator for a malicious act or omission or for gross negligence of the operator.
Maryland Code, Courts Article, Section 5-639(b) (1990, 2006 Repl. Vol.).
Tus to successfully prove this defense, a defendant police officer must show he was: 1) Operating an emergency vehicle at the time of the accident; 2) Authorized to operate said vehicle at the time of the accident; and 3) performing emergency services at the time of the accident. In both cases noted above, the litigation involved whether
the officer was performing emergency services at the time of the accident. Emergency Service is defined as:
i. Responding to an emergency call; ii. Pursuing a violator or a suspected violator of the law; or
iii. Responding to, but not while returning from, a fire alarm.
Maryland Code, Transportation Article 19-103(a)(3) (1983, 2006 Repl. Vol.) In Schreyer, supra, a member of the Baltimore Police
Department’s Special Enforcement team, was driving a marked patrol vehicle when he observed what he felt was an illegal drug transaction. He saw individuals lined up [in an alley] and it appeared that one individual was handing small objects to the people in this line. Schreyer, supra at 103. Although he wanted to investigate the matter further, he needed to do so surreptitiously. Tus, he made a u-turn down a one way street without activating his emergency siren and was going against traffic. While doing so, he collided with a motor vehicle injuring both of the occupants of said vehicle. Te case was initially tried in the District Court and the
lower court held that the officer was not entitled to immunity pursuant to 5-639 of the Courts Article because the officer
Trial Reporter / Spring 2011 37
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68