Questions about the 'Good Samaritan' case

I have several questions regarding this case, only one of which was answered by the California Supreme Court brief.

Were alcohol or drugs a factor here? Was Ms. Torti's judgment chemically impaired? According to the brief, Ms. Van Horn and Ms. Torti had smoked marijuana and consumed at least several drinks prior to to the accident. This point, though mentioned in the brief, was apparently not part of the legal arguments.

Had Ms. Torti ever had a First Aid class, or Driver's Ed, or any other class that could have taught her what to do in a situation like this. Had she ever been offered one?

What other outside pressures have been brought to bear here? Is Ms. Van Horn's insurance company behind this? Is she being forced to pursue this, win or lose, in order to obtain the care she needs?

Moderator