Uploaded March 2025 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Maldonado v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.
Arizona Court of Appeals
129 Ariz. 165, 629 P.2d 1001 (1981)
One of the duties that may arise under tort law is the duty to render aid or assistance to someone injured in certain circumstances.
In Maldonado versus Southern Pacific Transportation Company, the court determined whether train employees had a duty to help someone injured by their train.
At around nine twenty on an August night in nineteen seventy seven, Mexican citizen Salvador Maldonado attempted to board a Southern Pacific freight train as the train passed through a small town in Arizona. When Maldonado tried to board the train, four train employees caused the train cars to jerk or bump.
Maldonado fell off the train and under the wheels.
His left arm was severed, his left leg and knee were severely injured, and he had multiple open and bleeding wounds.
Maldonado called out to two train employees on the caboose's platform for help as the train slowly passed him. The employees didn't do anything to help him. Three people heard Maldonado screaming and came to help. The two train employees on the caboose yelled at the three people in an attempt to keep them away and keep Maldonado from getting aid.
The three people were distracted by this and delayed in providing assistance, but ignored the employees and helped Maldonado.
Maldonado sued Southern Pacific, alleging intentional infliction of injury, wanton and reckless infliction of injury, interference with a savior, failure to render aid, and failure to call for medical assistance or report the injury. Southern Pacific moved to dismiss the third, fourth, and fifth claims. The court granted the motion.
Maldonado appealed.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/maldonado-v-southern-pacific-transportation-co
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/maldonado-v-southern-pacific-transportation-co
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. Quimbee has over 42,700 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 988 casebooks ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Maldonado v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.
Arizona Court of Appeals
129 Ariz. 165, 629 P.2d 1001 (1981)
One of the duties that may arise under tort law is the duty to render aid or assistance to someone injured in certain circumstances.
In Maldonado versus Southern Pacific Transportation Company, the court determined whether train employees had a duty to help someone injured by their train.
At around nine twenty on an August night in nineteen seventy seven, Mexican citizen Salvador Maldonado attempted to board a Southern Pacific freight train as the train passed through a small town in Arizona. When Maldonado tried to board the train, four train employees caused the train cars to jerk or bump.
Maldonado fell off the train and under the wheels.
His left arm was severed, his left leg and knee were severely injured, and he had multiple open and bleeding wounds.
Maldonado called out to two train employees on the caboose's platform for help as the train slowly passed him. The employees didn't do anything to help him. Three people heard Maldonado screaming and came to help. The two train employees on the caboose yelled at the three people in an attempt to keep them away and keep Maldonado from getting aid.
The three people were distracted by this and delayed in providing assistance, but ignored the employees and helped Maldonado.
Maldonado sued Southern Pacific, alleging intentional infliction of injury, wanton and reckless infliction of injury, interference with a savior, failure to render aid, and failure to call for medical assistance or report the injury. Southern Pacific moved to dismiss the third, fourth, and fifth claims. The court granted the motion.
Maldonado appealed.
Want more details on this case? Get the rule of law, issues, holding and reasonings, and more case facts here: quimbee.com/cases/maldonado-v-southern-pacific-transportation-co
The Quimbee App features over 42,700 case briefs keyed to 988 casebooks. Try it free for 7 days! ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Have Questions about this Case? Submit your questions and get answers from a real attorney here: quimbee.com/cases/maldonado-v-southern-pacific-transportation-co
Did we just become best friends? Stay connected to Quimbee here:
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel ► youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=QuimbeeDotCom
Quimbee Case Brief App ► quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview
Facebook ► facebook.com/quimbeedotcom
Twitter ► twitter.com/quimbeedotcom
#casebriefs #lawcases #casesummaries
