Monday, September 1st11.8°C
22736
22916

Court: Large retailers in California not required to have defibrillators for cardiac arrest

SAN FRANCISCO - The California Supreme Court on Monday ruled that large retailers aren't required to have defibrillators on hand to help treat customers and workers who suffer sudden cardiac arrest.

The ruling signals the end of a Los Angeles-area family's wrongful-death lawsuit alleging Target was liable for a customer's sudden death from cardiac arrest because it didn't have one of the devices as part of its first-aid plan.

The state Supreme Court ruled such a requirement was an unfair burden on Target Corp.

But the court said it was best left to the state Legislature to decide if retailers should have the devices on hand to deliver a life-saving jolt of electricity to a stalled heart. Lawmakers are in a better position to determine if retailers should be required to have defibrillators by writing detailed legislation, the court said.

Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye wrote for the court that "we believe that in this context the Legislature is generally in the best position to examine, evaluate and resolve the public policy considerations relevant to the duty question."

For two decades, an increasing number of public places in the U.S. have been required to have automated external defibrillators on hand, including government buildings, airports and many other public places. In that time, defibrillators have become cheaper to buy and easier to use. All 50 states and the federal government have laws requiring various entities to have the devices in place, beginning with a Florida law passed in 1997.

Oregon is the only state that requires large retailers to have defibrillators, which are widely acknowledged as a powerful lifesaver if used immediately after a cardiac arrest. The American Heart Association says as many as 300,000 Americans suffer cardiac arrest each year and that the quick use of a defibrillator can increase survival rates from 8 per cent to 30 per cent.

The case before the California Supreme Court arises from a wrongful-death lawsuit the Verdugo family filed in federal court against Target. After a federal judge tossed out the lawsuit, the family appealed to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The federal appeals court asked the California Supreme Court to determine if large retailers are required under state law to have the devices.

Now that the state high court said Target isn't required, it's expected the lawsuit will be dismissed.

The Canadian Press


Read more Business News

20759


Recent Trending




Today's Market
S&P TSX15625.73+67.561
S&P CDNX1023.991.62
DJIA17098.4518.88
Nasdaq4580.271+22.577
S&P 5002003.37+6.63
CDN Dollar0.9210+0.0016
Gold1281.70-2.1001
Oil95.96+1.29
Lumber349.60+2.60
Natural Gas3.965+0.054

 
Okanagan Companies
Pacific Safety0.20+0.005
Knighthawk0.01-0.005
QHR Technologies Inc1.190.00
Cantex0.08+0.01
Anavex Life Sciences0.25+0.01
Metalex Ventures0.0750.00
Russel Metals36.48+0.09
Copper Mountain Mining2.93+0.02
Colorado Resources0.180.00
ReliaBrand Inc0.10+0.001
Sunrise Resources Ltd0.0250.00
Mission Ready Services0.245-0.005

 



22551

FEATURED Property
1914202779 Long Ridge Drive, Kelowna, BC
3 bedrooms 4 baths
$949,000
more details
image2image2image2
Click here to feature your property
Please wait... loading


At the Core: Lessons in pricing from Apple

Apple has taught many entrepreneurs the importance of design, how to create buzz when introducing new products to the marketplace, how to pioneer new technology and the importance of superior quality....


New Real Estate Brokerage in town

Move over “big guys” there’s a new brokerage in town featuring local expertise, long standing experience and a fresh boutique approach. Kelowna, August 31 2014 – You may have...


How much mortgage should you carry?

There are several things to consider when deciding how much home to buy. 1. Draw up a budget including the new mortgage payments. While the rules used by most lenders require that the mortgage paym...

_








Member of BC Press Council


22810