On Monday this week, the State of Connecticut’s Good Samaritan law immunized the owners, managers and operators of athletic fields in Stamford.[1] The lawsuit, brought by a rugby coach’s widow, accused the defendants of failing to maintain a working defibrillator/AED on hand. The widow, Beth Blanco, eventually brought claims against the defendants for negligence and a loss of consortium due to his injuries almost two years after the incident. Beth’s husband, Carlos Blanco, passed away in May 2020.[2]
Carlos was an assistant coach for a local rugby club when he suffered a cardiac arrest during a practice in March of 2017. Team members immediately started to perform CPR and notified the facility staff, who called 911 and retrieved the AED.[3] However, the AED they returned with did not work properly, so a team member had to go get a second AED device. The issue is that it took approximately 15 minutes to get an operating AED and begin shocking Carlos – which according to the plaintiff, was a substantial factor in causing Carlos to go into a coma.[4]
The 15-minute delay prolonged the use of CPR and forced Carlos, then 73, to undergo “aggressive CPR.”[5] This resulted in broken ribs and “extensive cardiac rehabilitation and medical treatment and aggravation of a pre-existing heart condition.”[6] Carlos “also experienced pain, vocal cord injury, difficulty with exertion and balance, and other physical and emotional ailments from the ordeal.”[7] The plaintiff alleged that the defendants are liable for “failing to ensure they had a working AED or inspecting it regularly; staffing was insufficient, employees were not properly trained and did not follow manufacturer instructions; and they did not charge the AEDs batteries, post notices about the devices’ locations or properly supervise the athletic fields.”[8]
The court ultimately held that the defendants were immune from liability due to a Connecticut Good Samaritan Law. Specifically, “Connecticut General Statutes Section 57-557b shields entities that provide and maintain automated external defibrillators, or AEDs, from liability in such cases.”[9] Additionally, the court stated that the Good Samaritan Law actually benefited Carlos and if it were not for this law the bystanders may have not been inclined to act, out of fear of being sued. The Connecticut legislature wants to encourage the use of AEDs. Furthermore, the court reiterated the fact that, “[w]ithout immunity, places would not have [AEDs] and more people would die.”[10]
Despite the court’s granting of immunity, it is clear that facilities are not prepared for situations such as the one that happened here. This is a major concern nationwide among athletes and sports venue owners and operators. This is especially important because ever since COVID there has been an increase in sudden cardiac arrest incidents, especially with traditionally low-risk groups/ages. “[T]he data show[s] the increase was most significant among individuals ages 25-44, who are not usually considered at high risk for heart attack.”[11] “By the second year of the pandemic, the “observed” compared to “predicted” rates of heart attack death had increased by 29.9% for adults ages 25-44, by 19.6% for adults ages 45-64, and by 13.7% for adults age 65 and older.”[12]
[1] ‘Good Samaritan Law’ Immunizes Defib Defendants, Court Told – Law360
[2] Id.
[3] Id.
[4] Id.
[5] Id,
[6] Id.
[7] Id.
[8] Id.
[9] Id.
[10] Id.
[11] COVID-19 Surges Linked to Spike in Heart Attacks (cedars-sinai.org)
[12] Id.
Leave a Reply