Transcare Maryland, Inc. v. Murray
64 A.3d 887
Md.2013Background
- Good Samaritan Act and Fire and Rescue Act provide immunity related to emergency medical services.
- Case involved TransCare, a for-profit ambulance company, and Bryson Murray, a minor patient transported during an interfacility helicopter transfer.
- Barbour, a TransCare EMT-P, rode along for orientation during the UMMS/PHI flight; the alleged negligence occurred during transport.
- Murray filed a negligence action alleging Barbour’s failure to provide standard of care and vicarious liability for TransCare.
- The circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of TransCare, relying on both acts; the Court of Special Appeals reversed; the Court grants certiorari to resolve immunity questions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CJ § 5-603(b)(3) immunizes TransCare as a corporation. | Murrays contend no immunity for for-profit corporations. | TransCare argues it is immune under CJ § 5-603(b)(3) as a volunteer ambulance and rescue squad. | TransCare is not immune under CJ § 5-603(b)(3). |
| Whether an employer has immunity simply because its employee has immunity under the Good Samaritan Act. | Immunity should extend to employer by vicarious liability shield. | Employer immunity requires an independent basis; employee immunity alone is insufficient. | Employer does not automatically share employee immunity; independent basis required. |
| Whether TransCare can be immune under the Fire and Rescue Act as a private rescue company. | Fire and Rescue Act broad immunity should cover private entities performing rescue functions. | Commercial ambulance company not conclusively a rescue company; needs showing it performs rescue functions. | Commercial ambulance company not shown to be a rescue company here; no immunity under Fire and Rescue Act. |
Key Cases Cited
- Chase v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 360 Md. 121, 756 A.2d 987 (2000) (Md. 2000) (broader immunity context for emergency services; municipal scope)
- WSSC v. Riverdale Heights Volunteer Fire Co., 308 Md. 556, 520 A.2d 1319 (1987) (Md. 1987) (legislative/history analysis of government-like immunity)
- McCoy v. Hatmaker, 135 Md.App. 693, 763 A.2d 1233 (2000) (Md. Ct. App. 2000) (issues of severability and immunity in employer-employee context)
- D’Aoust v. Diamond, 424 Md. 549, 36 A.3d 941 (2012) (Md. 2012) (immunity in vicarious liability and agency relationships)
- James v. Prince George’s County, 288 Md. 315, 418 A.2d 1173 (1980) (Md. 1980) (principles on government-related immunities and scope)
- Utica Mutual Ins. Co. v. Gaithersburg Wash. Grove Fire Dep’t, 53 Md.App. 589, 455 A.2d 987 (1983) (Md. App. 1983) (designates private nonprofit rescue as not necessarily a government actor)