MOTION TO DISMISS
TO THE HONORABLE COURT:
COMES NOW the Defendant, San Andreas State Police (SASP), by and through counsel, and respectfully moves this Honorable Court to dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
In support thereof, Defendant states as follows:
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter arises from emergency medical assistance rendered following a water-submersion incident involving Plaintiff Chloe Jade during an active law enforcement encounter.
Plaintiff alleges that CPR administered by responding personnel constituted negligence and caused physical injury. However, Plaintiff’s own filings and submitted medical documentation establish the existence of a significant medical emergency consistent with drowning and airway compromise.
Under the controlling precedent established in Doegood v. San Andreas, individuals rendering emergency assistance may not be held civilly liable absent negligent conduct. Plaintiff has failed to sufficiently allege or substantiate facts establishing negligent emergency medical intervention.
Accordingly, dismissal is proper.
II. STATEMENT OF FACTS
On or about April 20, 2026, members of the San Andreas State Police responded to a vehicle theft incident involving Plaintiff Chloe Jade.
During the encounter, Plaintiff fled on foot and entered a body of water. Incident documentation states Plaintiff “did not swim up,” causing responding personnel to reasonably perceive a potential drowning or medical emergency.
Emergency assistance, including CPR, was rendered following Plaintiff’s removal from the water.
Plaintiff subsequently filed suit alleging unnecessary CPR, broken ribs, and resulting damages.
Plaintiff has since referenced and submitted medical documentation allegedly related to the incident, including Surgical Report 809. Said report references:
- drowning,
- airway damage,
- removal of water,
- and a rock obstructing Plaintiff’s airway.
The submitted medical documentation appears consistent with a significant water-submersion emergency involving drowning-related complications and airway obstruction.
III. ARGUMENT
A. DOEGOOD V. SAN ANDREAS BARS LIABILITY ABSENT NEGLIGENCE
The controlling precedent in Doegood v. San Andreas states:
“A person who renders emergency assistance to an individual may not be sued for their actions unless those actions are negligent.”
The undisputed facts establish that responding personnel rendered emergency aid during a perceived drowning or submersion emergency after Plaintiff entered the water and failed to resurface.
Plaintiff’s own submitted medical documentation further supports the existence of a substantial medical emergency involving drowning-related complications and airway obstruction.
Under these circumstances, liability cannot attach absent sufficiently pleaded facts establishing negligent emergency intervention.
B. PLAINTIFF FAILS TO SUFFICIENTLY ESTABLISH NEGLIGENCE
Plaintiff’s allegations remain conclusory and unsupported by competent evidence establishing that the emergency medical response grossly deviated from accepted lifesaving standards.
Importantly, Plaintiff’s submitted medical documentation does not state:
- that CPR was improperly administered,
- that CPR violated accepted protocol,
- or that responding personnel acted negligently.
Rather, the records substantiate the existence of:
- drowning-related complications,
- airway obstruction,
- and emergency trauma treatment consistent with a legitimate medical emergency.
Additionally, rib fractures are widely recognized complications associated with emergency CPR administration and do not independently establish negligence.
To date, Plaintiff has failed to provide:
- expert testimony establishing negligent CPR administration,
- competent medical findings attributing injuries specifically to negligent conduct,
- or evidence demonstrating that responding personnel knowingly acted outside objectively reasonable emergency medical standards.
C. IMPLIED CONSENT APPLIES DURING PERCEIVED MEDICAL EMERGENCIES
To the extent Plaintiff alleges battery based upon lack of consent, emergency medical doctrine recognizes implied consent where an individual is reasonably believed to be incapacitated or facing imminent bodily harm.
Given the circumstances alleged, including Plaintiff entering the water, failing to resurface, airway obstruction, and drowning-related complications, responding personnel acted under an objectively reasonable belief that emergency intervention was necessary.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s battery claim likewise fails.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Defendant San Andreas State Police respectfully requests that this Honorable Court:
Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint in its entirety;
Dismiss all claims with prejudice;
Award any further relief the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully submitted,
Jeremiah Sharp
Assistant District Attorney
San Andreas District Attorney's Office
