Court Opinion

ID: 9739878
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:22:49.668448+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:14.449680
License: Public Domain

R. L. Tahvonen, J.
(concurring in part and dissenting in part). I respectfully dissent from my colleagues’ remand of this case for reconsideration on the question of plaintiff’s comparative negligence. Although I agree with the majority’s analysis of the rescue doctrine in light of the adoption of comparative negligence, I believe the trial court has already expressly found that the activities of the plaintiff at the time this tragedy occurred were beyond the scope of the intended rescue effort. Moreover, I am persuaded that such a finding is not clearly erroneous and thus must be affirmed on appeal.
In all other respects, I concur with the majority.