Olson v. Federal American Partners

567 P.2d 710 (1977)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Olson v. Federal American Partners

Wyoming Supreme Court
567 P.2d 710 (1977)

Facts

Ralph Olson was an underground uranium miner who worked for Continental Uranium Company (Continental) for roughly 12 years. Olson then worked for Federal American Partners (Federal) (defendant) for six months, for Continental again for three months, and then for Federal again for nearly a year. Olson became sick during his second employment with Federal, and he subsequently died of lung cancer. Olson’s dependents (plaintiffs) sought compensation from Federal under Wyoming’s Occupational Disease Law, alleging that Olson’s lung cancer was caused by occupational radiation exposure. The dependents alleged that Olson had last been injuriously exposed to radiation at Federal, which made Federal liable under the Wyoming statute. Federal produced evidence that the radiation levels to which Federal’s miners were exposed were within permissible limits set by the federal government. Federal also asserted that there was no certainty that Olson, a habitual cigarette smoker, had developed lung cancer due to his employment. At trial, Olson’s dependents presented expert testimony about the high incidence of lung cancer in uranium miners due to radiation exposure. The dependents’ expert testimony also indicated that miners who smoked had a greater incidence of lung cancer than nonsmoking miners because tobacco could either cause or promote the development of cancer. The expert admitted that he could not be medically certain that Olson’s death was caused solely by radiation exposure, but he testified that the lung cancer most probably resulted from radiation exposure. The expert further testified that exposure to radiation within permissible limits would not be injurious exposure that would contribute to or promote the development of cancer. The trial court denied the dependents’ claim, holding that the dependents had not established by a preponderance of the evidence that Olson’s cancer was causally connected to Olson’s employment at Federal. The dependents appealed to the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Raper, J.)

Dissent (Rose, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 791,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 791,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 791,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership