Full question:
What would be the legal violation for a fire chief that knowingly hires and allows a firefighter who did not possess an EMT certification to practice and allow this person to work in the capacity of an EMT when he does not possess one? The firefighter himself Violated CA H&S 1797.177. Can the fire chief be prosecuted for gross negligence for allowing this person to treat the public while putting their safety at risk? If so, what is the law regarding this matter?
- Category: Government
- Subcategory: Public Employee Liability
- Date:
- State: California
Answer:
The California Tort Claims Act (Act) (Gov. Code, § 810 et seq.) governs actions
against public entities and public employees.
A public entity may be directly liable for failure to discharge a mandatory duty.
Section 815.6 provides: “Where a public entity is under a mandatory duty imposed by an
enactment that is designed to protect against the risk of a particular kind of injury, the
public entity is liable for an injury of that kind proximately caused by its failure to
discharge the duty unless the public entity establishes that it exercised reasonable
diligence to discharge the duty.” (Stats. 1963, ch. 1681, § 1, p. 3268.)
The public entity isn't liable if an employee acts outside of his authority. Generally, in order to hold a person negligent, it must be shown that they failed to carry out a duty and that failure was the cause of harm to another. Please see the legal discussion beginning on p.23 of the case at the following link for an in-depth discussion of the evidence needed in CA to prove public employee liability and/or a negligent hiring claim:
This content is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Legal statutes mentioned reflect the law at the time the content was written and may no longer be current. Always verify the latest version of the law before relying on it.
