Glenview Park District v. Melhus
540 F.2d 1321 (1976)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An organizer of a recreational water activity has a duty to make reasonable inquiries into current water conditions and warn participants of any potential hazards arising from those conditions. A breach of this duty can constitute negligence and be a proximate cause of resulting injuries.
Facts:
- The Glenview Park District advertised a supervised 15-mile canoe trip down the Fox River, which it had determined was generally calm and slow-moving.
- When Mrs. Melhus registered, a Glenview secretary told her the trip required minimal skill and would be 'perfectly safe' for her young children.
- Glenview supervisors had conducted a reconnaissance trip weeks earlier but assumed conditions would be the same on the day of the event and did not check with any gauging stations or other sources for current river information.
- On September 30, 1972, the day of the trip, the Fox River was at flood stage, causing the water level to be higher and closer to overhanging tree branches along the banks.
- Dr. George E. Melhus, a participant, was an inexperienced canoer and a non-swimmer.
- During the trip, the Melhus canoe struck a low-hanging tree limb while attempting to navigate around trees in the water.
- The canoe capsized, and Dr. Melhus drowned in the 8 to 10-foot-deep water.
Procedural Posture:
- The Glenview Park District initiated the lawsuit by filing a petition in federal district court seeking exoneration from or limitation of liability.
- The decedent's widow, Mrs. Melhus, filed a wrongful death claim against Glenview within that action.
- Following a bench trial, the district court denied Glenview's petition for limitation of liability.
- The district court entered judgment in favor of Glenview on the wrongful death claim, finding it was not negligent.
- Mrs. Melhus appealed the judgment on the wrongful death claim to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and Glenview cross-appealed the denial of its petition for limitation of liability.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Did the Glenview Park District act negligently by failing to check for hazardous river conditions, such as flood stage, and warn participants of the associated dangers before a supervised canoe trip?
Opinions:
Majority - Pell, Circuit Judge.
Yes. The Glenview Park District acted negligently by failing to check for and warn of hazardous river conditions. The district court applied an erroneously narrow concept of proximate cause by focusing solely on Dr. Melhus's canoeing incompetence. Glenview, having undertaken to sponsor a supervised trip and having assured participants of its safety, had a duty to inquire about current river conditions. The court reasoned that a quick and inexpensive telephone call to a water gauging station would have revealed the river was at flood stage, a condition that predictably increased the danger of overhanging branches. Glenview's failure to make this inquiry and its failure to warn participants of this specific hazard were negligent omissions that constituted a proximate cause of the fatal accident.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the scope of the duty of care for organizers of recreational activities under admiralty law. It establishes that the duty is not fulfilled by initial planning alone but requires ongoing diligence, including checking for current conditions immediately prior to an event. The decision broadens the application of proximate cause, holding that an organizer's negligent failure to warn can be a causative factor even if the victim's own lack of skill contributed to the accident. This precedent holds public and private organizers to a standard of making reasonable, timely inquiries about foreseeable dangers and communicating those dangers to participants.
