In Hubbard v. Boelt (1980) 28 Cal.3d 480, an officer chasing a fleeing motorist was injured when his patrol car crashed while the officer was attempting to avoid the wreckage of a collision between the vehicle of the fleeing motorist and the vehicle of an innocent third party. The officer contended that "the fireman's rule should not apply to the present case, because his injuries were not caused by defendant's original act of speeding, but by his subsequent act of accelerating to avoid capture, thus resisting arrest at high speeds. Plaintiff asserts that the fireman's rule was not intended to bar recovery for independent acts of misconduct which were not the cause of the plaintiff's presence at the accident scene. We have confirmed the validity of this principle in the abstract . . . . In the present case, however, no such independent act occurred. Plaintiff was injured while pursuing a speeding traffic violator, and in discharge of his official duty incurred the very risk which occasioned his presence at the accident scene." ( Hubbard v. Boelt, supra, at pp. 486-487.)