The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Freddie went into D and ordered a meal, while P went across the street to a convenience store to make a telephone call. While eating, Freddie discovered broken glass in his food and began spitting out food, broken glass and blood. P entered the restaurant, discovered Freddie in distress, and observed a bloody napkin with food and broken glass. She then requested that D's employees summon an ambulance. The only out-going telephone line was behind locked doors, and, professing their inability to telephone for assistance, D demanded payment for Freddie's meal. Payment was made, and P placed Freddie in her automobile with the intention to take Freddie to the nearest hospital. En route P entered an intersection adjacent to D on a green light, and another automobile collided with P, causing P and Freddie injury. P and Freddie sued D under a negligence theory. D moved for summary judgment and P put forward that D was liable under the 'rescue doctrine.' The court granted summary judgment and P appealed.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.