Wagenblast v. Odessa School District
758 P.2d 968 (1988) 110 Wash. 2d 845 (1988)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An exculpatory clause that purports to release a public school district from liability for its own future negligence, required as a condition for student participation in interscholastic athletics, is invalid as it violates public policy.
Facts:
- The Odessa School District required students Alexander and Charles Wagenblast, and Ethan and Katie Herdrick, to sign a standardized release form to participate in interscholastic athletics.
- The Seattle School District required students Richard and Paul Vulliet to sign a similar standardized release form to participate on the wrestling team.
- These forms released the school districts from 'liability resulting from any ordinary negligence' that might occur in connection with the school's athletic programs.
- The Odessa district's form was required as part of an insurance pool arrangement with other small school districts.
- In both cases, students could not participate in the athletic programs unless they and their parents signed the release forms as written.
- The families in both cases attempted to modify the forms to remove the release language, but the school districts refused the modifications.
Procedural Posture:
- The Wagenblasts and Herdricks sued the Odessa School District in the Superior Court for Lincoln County for injunctive relief.
- The Vulliets sued the Seattle School District in the Superior Court for King County for declaratory and injunctive relief.
- The Lincoln County trial court granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs, enjoining the Odessa School District from using the releases.
- The King County trial court, after a trial, denied the plaintiffs' requested relief, upholding the Seattle School District's use of the releases.
- The Odessa School District (defendant-appellant) appealed the adverse ruling directly to the Supreme Court of Washington.
- The Vulliets (plaintiffs-appellants) appealed their adverse ruling to the Court of Appeals.
- The Supreme Court of Washington transferred the Vulliets' appeal to itself and consolidated the two cases.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Do standardized release forms that absolve public school districts of all liability for their own future negligence, and are required for student participation in interscholastic athletics, violate public policy?
Opinions:
Majority - Andersen, J.
Yes, such release forms violate public policy. While parties can generally contract to release one another from liability for negligence, such agreements are invalid when public policy considerations for preserving a duty of care outweigh the freedom to contract. Applying the six-factor test from Tunkl v. Regents of Univ. of Cal., the court found that interscholastic athletics are a service of great public importance, are subject to public regulation, and are offered to any student meeting established standards. The school districts possess a decisive bargaining advantage over students, confronting them with a standardized adhesion contract with no alternative for participation. Finally, participation places the student under the control of the school district, subject to the risk of its carelessness. Because all six factors indicating a violation of public policy were present, the exculpatory releases are invalid.
Analysis:
This decision establishes the Tunkl test as the standard in Washington for determining when an exculpatory agreement violates public policy. It significantly limits the ability of public schools, and likely other public or quasi-public entities, to use liability waivers for essential services they provide. The case affirms that a school's duty of care to students participating in integral school activities is non-waivable, thereby prioritizing student safety and institutional accountability over contractual freedom in this context. This precedent will influence future cases involving liability waivers for services deemed essential or of great importance to the public.
Unlock the full brief for Wagenblast v. Odessa School District