Smith v. United States

Decision Date31 October 1974
Docket NumberCiv. No. 5809.
Citation383 F. Supp. 1076
PartiesCameron SMITH, by his next friend E. J. Smith, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Wyoming

W. Perry Dray, Hirst, Applegate & Dray, Cheyenne, Wyo., and William R. Purdy, Toronto, Canada, for plaintiff.

Richard V. Thomas, U. S. Atty., Dist. Wyoming, for defendant.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

KERR, District Judge.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. This action is brought by the plaintiff, Cameron Smith, by and through his next friend, his father, E. J. Smith, against the United States of America pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act, Title 28, United States Code, Sections 2671 et seq. and 1346(b). The plaintiff is a citizen and resident of Ottawa, in the Province of Ontario, Canada, and at the time of the events leading to this action he was a citizen and resident of Scarborough, one of the buroughs of Toronto, in the Province of Ontario, Canada.

2. The events out of which this action arises occurred in Yellowstone National Park, which is located primarily in the State of Wyoming, but partially in the adjacent states of Idaho and Montana. Yellowstone National Park is by statute a part of the District of Wyoming.

3. Yellowstone National Park is managed by the National Park Service of the Department of Interior of the United States of America, which in managing such parks is required by Title 16, United States Code, Section 1, to "promote and regulate the use of the Federal areas known as national parks, monuments, and reservations hereinafter specified, except such as are under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Army, as provided by law, by such means and measures as conform to the fundamental purpose of the said parks, monuments, and reservations, which purpose is to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations."

4. At or about midmorning on August 26, 1970, the plaintiff, Cameron Smith, with his father, E. J. Smith, and his mother, Mrs. Geraldine O. Smith, and his two brothers and three sisters arrived at the North Entrance to Yellowstone National Park at Gardiner, Montana.

5. At that time, Mr. E. J. Smith paid the usual vehicular entry fee for the vehicle and all of its occupants, and the family proceeded on into Yellowstone National Park.

6. A regulation of the Secretary of the Interior, which had been adopted in accordance with law and which was in effect on August 26, 1970, provided that, "no entrance or admission fees shall be charged at Designated Fee Areas requiring such fees for persons who have not reached their sixteenth birthday; . . .", and on August 26, 1970, plaintiff Cameron Smith was fourteen years old.

7. A statute of the State of Wyoming provides that, "Except as specifically recognized by or provided in section 5 of this act, ... an owner of land owes no duty of care to keep the premises safe for entry or use by others for recreational purposes, or to give any warning of a dangerous condition, use, structure, or activity on such premises to persons entering for such purposes." Section 34-389.2, Wyo.Stat., 1957 as amended (1973 Cum.Supp.), Sess.Laws, 1965, Chap. 9, Section 2.

8. One of the two exceptions to the aforesaid statute is as follows, "Nothing in this act . . . limits in any way any liability which otherwise exists ... (b) Where landowner charges for entry. — For injury suffered in any case where the owner of land charges the person or persons who enter or go on the land for the recreational use thereof, except that in the case of land leased to the state or a subdivision thereof, any consideration received by the owner for such lease shall not be deemed a charge within the meaning of this section." Sec. 34-389.5, Wyo.Stat., 1957, as amended (1973 Cum. Supp.), Sess. Laws, 1965, Chap. 9, Sec. 5. There was no charge to Cameron Smith in this instance.

9. At the time the Smith family entered Yellowstone National Park they received a park brochure prepared by the National Park Service which contained a map of Yellowstone National Park on one side and information about the park on the other.

10. Encompassed in the brochure which was furnished to the Smith family was the following language which was printed in blue to set it off from the rest of the text printed in black:

"Thin crusts overlie and conceal pools of boiling water. Each year, many careless visitors are burned. For your safety, stay on the trails or boardwalks at all times — watch your children carefully. Keep pets under physical restraint."

11. Neither Cameron Smith nor any other members of the Smith family read the warning language in the brochure which was furnished to them upon their entry into Yellowstone National Park.

12. The Smiths proceeded into Yellowstone National Park to the Mammoth Hot Springs area, where they stopped to view the Mammoth Hot Springs.

13. Mammoth Hot Springs is a developed area within Yellowstone National Park, and boardwalks and paths are constructed and maintained there by the National Park Service for the utilization of park visitors in viewing the attractions at Mammoth Hot Springs. There are posted in that area signs advising visitors to stay on the boardwalks and trails.

14. While at Mammoth Hot Springs some of the members of the Smith family departed from the boardwalks and trails, and another visitor pointed out to them the sign which advised them to stay on the boardwalks and trails. At this juncture Mr. Smith warned the members of his family of the danger present and warned them that they should stay on the boardwalks and trails.

15. At Mammoth Hot Springs the Smith family observed a hole at the bottom of the boardwalk which was fenced off with a metal fence. This hole had a warning sign by it and the family stopped and discussed that. Mr. Smith particularly pointed out to the children, including Cameron Smith, that such areas could give way or cave in.

16. After leaving Mammoth Hot Springs the Smith family proceeded further south toward Norris Junction, stopping once at Obsidian Cliff to observe that feature.

17. They then proceeded further south into Yellowstone National Park where, upon rounding some curves of the road, they observed steam coming from the ground in a meadow-like area to the right of the road in front of them.

18. On approaching this area they observed a paved turnout or parking area in which at least two other vehicles were parked, and they pulled into this area and parked.

19. At this time Mr. Edward James Smith again warned the children in the family with respect to the danger and the necessity of caution in the area. The family proceeded down a path through a grove of pine trees toward the area of thermal activity.

20. This area was not a developed area within Yellowstone National Park, and there were no constructed or maintained boardwalks or trails, nor were there any signs in the area.

21. On August 27, 1970, there was in effect a lawfully adopted regulation of the Department of Interior relating to Yellowstone National Park which provided as follows, "Foot travel in all thermal areas and within the Yellowstone Canyon between the Upper Falls and Inspiration Point must be confined to foot paths, boards or trails that are maintained for such travel and are marked by official signs."

22. At the point where plaintiff Cameron J. Smith sustained his injuries there were no foot paths, boardwalks or trails maintained for foot travel which were marked by official signs.

23. By its appearance the area was one of obvious danger in which boiling water could be observed in a number of small pools within the area, and steam was visible arising from these pools of boiling water.

24. Mrs. Geraldine O. Smith, upon observing the area, proceeded to determine where the children were because she felt that it was her responsibility to observe her children in such dangerous areas, and to watch over them.

25. Mrs. Geraldine O. Smith observed plaintiff Cameron Smith on his hands and knees adjacent to the hot pool in which he sustained his injuries and he was looking down into the pool.

26. Thereafter, plaintiff Cameron Smith stood up by the edge of the hot pool; the ground adjacent to the pool gave way under his weight; and he fell into the pool and was severely burned.

27. The thermal action of the pool in which plaintiff sustained his injuries had caused it to cut back underneath the surface of the ground on the northern and western side of the pool, and a portion of that bank of the pool did break off at about the same time.

28. The specific place where Cameron Smith was standing at the time he fell into the pool, however, was in the northeastern side of the pool and the bank at that point had not been undercut by the action of the spring.

29. Cameron James Smith sustained 2nd and 3rd degree burns from approximately the area of his armpits to his feet. He sustained 3rd degree burns from the waist on down and was hospitalized for approximately six (6) months while his injuries healed and skin grafting procedures were undertaken. Subsequently he returned to the hospital on several...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Childers v. US
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Montana
    • 2. Juli 1993
    ...required visitors to Yellowstone to exercise common sense when dealing with natural conditions. For instance, in Smith v. United States, 383 F.Supp. 1076 (D.Wy.1974), affirmed, 546 F.2d 872 (10th Cir.1976), the district court confronted a case where a fourteen year old fell into a thermal h......
  • Ducey v. U.S.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 27. Oktober 1983
    ...v. United States, 693 F.2d 1299 (9th Cir.1982) (inner tube rental fee not "fee" under Washington statute), and Smith v. United States, 383 F.Supp. 1076, 1080 (D.Wyo.1974) (vehicular fee to enter park not "charge" under Wyoming statute), aff'd on other grounds, 546 F.2d 872 (10th Cir.1976), ......
  • Zuk v. US
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida
    • 6. Oktober 1988
    ...the discretionary function exception and no liability may attach to the government therefor. Henretig, 490 F.Supp. at 404; Smith v. U.S., 383 F.Supp. 1076 (D.Wyo.1974), affirmed, Smith v. U.S., 546 F.2d 872 (10th Cir.1976); see also Dalehite v. U.S., 346 U.S. 15, 73 S.Ct. 956, 97 L.Ed. 1427......
  • Manning v. Barenz
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • 25. Februar 1992
    ...445 F.Supp. 770 (D.Or.1978); Hahn v. United States, 493 F.Supp. 57 (M.D.Pa.), aff'd, 639 F.2d 773 (3d Cir.1980); Smith v. United States, 383 F.Supp. 1076 (D.Wyo.1974); Hamilton v. United States, 371 F.Supp. 230 (E.D.Va.1974); Stone Mountain Memorial Assn. v. Herrington, 225 Ga. 746, 171 S.E......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT