Karr v. State
Washington Court of Appeals
765 P.2d 316 (1988)
- Written by Caitlinn Raimo, JD
Facts
Barbara Karr and others (the representatives) (plaintiffs) were the personal representatives of 14 individuals who died due of the eruption of Mount St. Helens in May 1980. Following the initial eruption in March 1980, Governor Dixy Lee Ray created restricted zones that could be accessed only by government, law enforcement, and search-and-rescue personnel. During this time, Governor Ray conferred with numerous experts and formed a Mount St. Helens watch group to ensure her decisions were informed. Governor Ray broadened the restricted zones in the following months as the eruptions continued, despite public pressure to keep the area open. However, the eruptions followed an unpredictable pattern and were larger in magnitude and area affected than experts had predicted. All of the representatives’ decedents were located outside of these restricted zones when they died. The representatives sued the State of Washington (defendant), alleging that Governor Ray failed to use reasoned judgment and was negligent in defining the restricted zones too narrowly, resulting in the decedents’ deaths. Both the representatives and the state moved for summary judgment. The trial court granted the state’s motion, finding that the state was immune from tort liability. The representatives appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cole, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
