United States v. Lawter
F.2d 559 (1955)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When the government voluntarily undertakes a rescue operation, it assumes a duty to perform the rescue with reasonable care and can be held liable for negligence that worsens the victim's position or causes harm.
Facts:
- Loretta Jean Lawter, her husband Oren Lawter, and two relatives were in a small boat in Biscayne Bay when its motor failed and the boat swamped, casting them into the water.
- A U.S. Coast Guard helicopter on a routine patrol flight spotted the four people in the water and decided to conduct a rescue.
- The helicopter crew included an experienced air-sea rescuer, Petty Officer Passmore, and an untrained crewman, Lloyd Antle.
- The pilot allowed the untrained crewman, Antle, to operate the rescue hoist and cable.
- Antle lowered the rescue cable to Loretta Jean Lawter.
- As her husband and brother-in-law were attempting to secure the rescue sling to her, Antle began hoisting the cable prematurely.
- Loretta Lawter, who was only holding on to the cable with her hands as the sling was not yet attached, was lifted partway to the helicopter.
- Antle stopped the hoist before she was high enough to be brought into the cabin, at which point she lost her grip, fell into the water, and died.
Procedural Posture:
- Oren Lawter (plaintiff) filed suit against the United States (defendant) in a federal trial court under the Public Vessels Act and the Tort Claims Act.
- The case was tried to a judge without a jury (a bench trial).
- The trial court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law in favor of Lawter, awarding him $10,000 in damages.
- The United States, as appellant, appealed the judgment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, arguing it was not liable and the finding of negligence was erroneous.
- Oren Lawter, as appellee, cross-appealed, arguing the damage award was inadequate.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the United States government assume a legal duty to act with reasonable care, creating liability for negligence under the Tort Claims Act, when its Coast Guard personnel voluntarily undertake a rescue mission and perform it in a negligent manner that results in death?
Opinions:
Majority - Chief Judge Hutcheson
Yes. When the government voluntarily undertakes an action, such as a rescue, it has a duty to perform that action with reasonable care. This case is not about a failure to act, but about a definite, affirmative act that was deliberately undertaken and negligently performed. The court applied the well-established principle that anyone who gratuitously undertakes to do something for another must not injure that person through negligent performance. The Coast Guard took exclusive control of the rescue mission, placing the deceased in a worse position than she was in before, and its negligence was the direct cause of her death. The actionable negligence was not the inexperience of the crewman himself, but the decision to permit an untrained man to conduct the rescue when an experienced rescuer was available and onboard.
Analysis:
This case is significant for its application of the 'Good Samaritan' or 'voluntary undertaking' doctrine to the actions of the U.S. government. It clarifies that while the government may not have a general duty to rescue citizens, once it affirmatively chooses to act, it is held to a standard of reasonable care, just like a private individual. The decision establishes that sovereign immunity does not protect the government from liability for negligence in the operational details of a rescue if that negligence worsens the victim's situation. This precedent ensures that government agents engaged in discretionary functions like rescue operations are still accountable for performing those operations non-negligently once undertaken.
Unlock the full brief for United States v. Lawter