United States v. Lawter

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Torts

TortsNegligenceRescue liabilityGovernment liabilityundertaking doctrinegratuitous rescueaffirmative actnegligent rescue

Facts

After a skiff swamped in Biscayne Bay, four passengers, including plaintiff's wife, were left in the water while a Coast Guard helicopter on routine patrol saw them and undertook the rescue. The helicopter carried both an experienced rescuer, Passmore, and an untrained crewman, Antle, but the pilot allowed Antle to conduct the hoist operation. While plaintiff and his brother were still trying to attach the belt or sling to plaintiff's wife, Antle began raising the cable; she was lifted while merely holding on with her hands, was stopped before reaching a proper height to be brought into the cabin, lost her grip, fell, and died. The trial court found the United States negligent and found no contributory negligence by plaintiff or the deceased.

Issue

Whether the United States could be held liable when Coast Guard personnel affirmatively undertook a rescue and allegedly performed it negligently, causing death. Also at issue was whether the trial court's findings on negligence, lack of contributory negligence, and damages were clearly erroneous.

Rule

When a party affirmatively undertakes to rescue another, even gratuitously, the law imposes a duty to use due and reasonable care in performing that undertaking and not to injure the person through negligent performance. Appellate review of a trial court's factual findings, including damages, is limited to whether those findings are clearly erroneous.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

During a spring flood near Tulsa, a county fire-rescue helicopter spotted Noah Bennett clinging to a tree in rising water. The crew announced by loudspeaker that it was taking over the rescue and waved off nearby kayakers, but the pilot assigned the winch to an untrained mechanic even though a certified hoist operator was on board; the mechanic began lifting before Noah's harness was secured, and Noah fell and suffered severe injuries.

If Noah sues for negligence, which is the strongest argument for liability?

Explanation. The governing rule is that one who affirmatively undertakes a rescue, even gratuitously, must exercise due and reasonable care in performing it and is liable for negligent performance that causes injury. The strongest basis is not a broad duty to rescue or strict liability, but the negligent execution of an undertaken rescue after the rescuers took charge and displaced others. (Derived from United States v. Lawter (n.d.).)