From Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly
Original publication date: March 7, 2011

On the afternoon of Feb. 7, 2008, the defendant dialed 911 and reported being stabbed during an ongoing home invasion. Local police were dispatched to the defendant’s home.

The plaintiff, the first local police officer dispatched to the scene, lost control of his vehicle on an icy road, skidded and struck a tree. He was trapped in the vehicle and had to be removed with the Jaws of Life. He ultimately was diagnosed with a concussion and soft-tissue knee and shoulder injuries.

A subsequent police investigation into the reported emergency determined that no home invasion occurred, that knife wounds suffered and observed on the defendant were self-inflicted, and that the 911 call was false. Criminal charges were brought against the defendant.

Prior to the filing of the civil action, the defendant admitted to making a false police report in order to bring an end to the criminal proceedings.

The plaintiff brought the civil action claiming that the false report of an emergency to 911 operators was the proximate cause of his accident and his injuries. He alleged that he was unable to work his standard patrolling shift, or any overtime or details, for weeks after the accident.

After discovery, defense counsel filed a motion for summary judgment, to which the plaintiff responded with a cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The plaintiff maintained that the defendant was liable for his injuries as a matter of law, since state law allows firefighters and police officers to bring civil action against third parties who may negligently cause a perilous situation that invites rescue.

Defense counsel successfully established that Massachusetts courts have consistently held that private citizens shall not be made to act as insurers of a police officer’s safety when police are called to the scene of an accident, that not all injuries to professional rescuers are within the scope of foreseeable risk, and that a collision involving a police cruiser that is unrelated to the incident to which the officer is responding falls outside of that scope.

The court entered summary judgment for the defendant, and an appeal by the plaintiff was subsequently dismissed on procedural grounds.

Action: Negligence & tort
Injuries alleged: Concussion, soft tissue injuries
Case name: Cahill v. Cassidy
Court/case no.: Gloucester District Court, No. 0939-CV-00562
Jury and/or judge: Joseph W. Jennings III
Amount: $0 (summary judgment for defendant)
Demand: $30,000
Highest offer: $0
Date: Dec. 21, 2010
Attorney: Jason R. Scopa, Law Offices of Peter E. Flynn, Saugus (for the defendant) 

Copyright © 2011 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms and Conditions, Privacy Policy