What is the Fireman’s Rule?

I’m David Holub, an attorney focusing on personal injury law in northwest Indiana.

Welcome to Personal Injury Primer, where we break down the law into simple terms, provide legal tips, and discuss personal injury law topics.

Today’s question comes from a caller whose husband, a police officer, was injured when he responded to a call to a tavern. An underaged patron was consuming alcohol. The patron became belligerent and slammed a chair over her husband’s back, seriously injuring him, when the officer responded to the call. She wanted to know if we could help.

Of course, the police officer injured as described by the caller would have a workers compensation claim due to the work injury he suffered.

But suing the patron who assaulted him or the tavern that served the alcohol and called him to the scene is the real question here.

Police officers and fireman have their normal ability to sue restricted by what is known as the “fireman’s rule.”

The “fireman’s rule” is a legal principle which states that a landowner owes no duty to a professional whose occupation by nature exposes them to particular risks, except the duty to abstain from any positive wrongful act which might cause them harm.

Let’s simplify that. The fireman’s rule, aside from limited exceptions, prevents a fireman or policeman from suing where they come onto the property to do their jobs if they are hurt while doing their jobs.

So, if her husband was another customer at the tavern and got hit by a chair, that customer could sue. The tavern owes her husband no duty, because his job required him to come to the tavern in response to a call for help.

Classic example. Your house is on fire, and you call the fire department. A fireman comes to put out the fire. If the fireman gets hurt putting out the fire, he can’t sue you.

Well, the fireman could sue you if, when he got to the house and asked if there were any explosives in the house, you lied and said no, and it turned out you were storing ammo, and the ammo exploded and injured the fireman.

Why? You did a positive wrongful act when you lied, which caused the fireman to enter the house. So you could be sued. If you told the truth about the danger, the firemen could stay back and stay safe while hosing down the fire. They went into the home and got hurt only because of the lie. Positive wrongful acts involve an element of willfulness on the part of the wrongdoer.

Suppose you called the fire department to put out a fire, and the fire started because you were using the house, in violation of statutes, to produce meth. Because of the statutory violation, the meth house operator could be sued for injuries suffered by a fireman.

The fireman’s rule makes sense in the large scheme of things. If a person is afraid they’ll be sued when reporting a fire, they might hesitate to report the fire. The fire might then spread beyond the ability to control. So, in their wisdom, courts established the fireman’s rule.

In the case of the caller, there still may be hope. As we said, the person operating a Meth house can be sued by a fireman injured responding to a fire. The minor was served alcohol and became belligerent. The tavern operator called for police help. Serving alcohol to minors is prohibited by law. The fireman’s rule should not bar a suit by the officer and his wife.

The violation of any statutes or ordinances not explicitly enacted to protect police officers responding to a complaint on a landowner’s premises should permit a lawsuit.

I hope you found this information helpful. If you are a victim of someone’s carelessness, substandard medical care, a product defect, work injury, or another personal injury, please call (219) 736-9700 with your questions. You can also learn more about us by visiting our website at DavidHolubLaw.com – while there, make sure you request a copy of our book “Fighting for Truth.”