Is a county liable for failing to provide medical treatment for a prisoner injured in a motor vehicle accident?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Marshall v. Los Angeles County, 131 Cal.App.2d 812, 281 P.2d 544 (Cal. App. 1955):
The case of Brindamour v. Murray, 7 Cal.2d 73, 59 P.2d 1099, relied upon by the county, is not controlling here. In that case a municipally owned car was being used in the private business of a captain of police when an accident happened. In this case the truck was being used for county business in the maintenance of the county's penal farm.
The demurrer was properly sustained as to the other three cause of action. In the absence of a statute imposing liability, a county is not liable for failure to furnish prisoners with medical assistance for treatment of injuries. Bryant v. County of Monterey, 125 Cal.App.2d 470, 270 P.2d 897.
Moreover, it is not alleged in any of these three causes of action that any of the county employees or sheriff's deputies was known by the sheriff to be an unfit or vicious person. Without such an allegation public officers are not liable for the torts of subordinates. Fernelius v. Pierce, 22 Cal.2d 226, 138 P.2d 12, 24.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
