Good Ruling

From the Chicago Tribune: California's top court on Monday unanimously ruled that large retailers are not required to provide automated external defibrillators (AEDs) inside their stores, deciding in favor of Target Corp in a wrongful death lawsuit brought after a shopper's sudden death.
The Supreme Court in California dismissed the argument that the U.S. retailer fell under a state health code statute that requires gyms and other "health studios" to make available the life-saving machines.
"We conclude that, under California law, Target's common law duty of care to its customers does not include a duty to acquire and make available an AED for use in a medical emergency," the six-judge panel wrote in an opinion on Monday.
The court's decision was a defeat for the mother and brother of 49-year-old Mary Ann Verdugo, who died of a sudden heart attack while shopping with her at a Target store in 2008 Pico Rivera, California, a city near Los Angeles. 
The wrongful death lawsuit alleged the company violated a common law duty to provide first aid to the large volume of customers that frequent its California stores daily, noting that AEDs retail on its website for $1,200.
"The inexpensive availability of AEDs and their ease of use with even minimal or no advance training have led to on-site CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) and AED assistance to now be an expected part of first aid response," the Verdugo's complaint said.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-california-court-target-20140623,0,4750914.story
While it would be nice to have an AED on site of a business- it should not be mandated.
And the California Supreme Court, in one of the few decisions I agree with, made the right ruling. 
If they ruled differently, would they then require an EMT or paramedic on site in case of a medical episode?
So, good for the California Supreme Court.