Weber v. State
2011 WY 127
| Wyo. | 2011Background
- Star Plunge facility sits on land owned by the State as part of Hot Springs State Park and leased to Star Plunge.
- The State supplies hot mineral water to Star Plunge and operates a heat-exchange facility cooling some water.
- Vapor Cave, a steam room built in 1976, has a fountain with hot water from Big Spring and no barriers for patrons.
- Francis Weber was severely burned in the Vapor Cave after losing consciousness in 2006.
- Weber sued Star Plunge, its principal, and later the State; the district court granted summary judgment to the State based on immunity.
- Wyoming Supreme Court reversed, finding the State’s activities in the park fell within the § 1-39-106 waiver for operation/maintenance of a public park and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 1-39-106 Waives immunity here | Weber argues waiver for negligence in operation/maintenance of a public park. | State contends Vapor Cave/Star Plunge activities are not within park operation/maintenance. | Yes; waiver applies to oversee operations within the park. |
| Interpretation of 'operation' and 'maintenance' of a park | Operation of park includes water delivery and construction oversight at lessee facilities. | Operation/maintenance do not extend to third-party concessionaire activities. | Terms include park facilities and activities within the park, including overseen lessee construction and water delivery. |
| Does § 36-8-304 and park governance support waiver | Statutes authorize leasing and regulating buildings; waives immunity for lessee design/construction and water delivery. | Statutory framework does not make the State guardian of third-party safety beyond park maintenance. | Combined reading supports waiver for oversight of lessee construction and water delivery. |
| Whether Soles/Sawyer distinctions foreclose waiver | Soles/Sawyer do not bar waiver since park operation includes oversight of park facilities and water delivery. | Sawyer limits operation to building-level issues; Soles limits maintenance to inspections, not park-wide safety. | Distinctions do not foreclose waiver under the park-operation interpretation here. |
Key Cases Cited
- State Dep't of Corrections v. Watts, 177 P.3d 793 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2008) (waiver for operation of a building; limits to building function)
- Soles v. State, 809 P.2d 772 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1991) (maintenance meaning: upkeep in repair; regulatory inspections not maintenance)
- Sawyer v. City of Sheridan, 793 P.2d 476 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1990) (operation of public utilities; not derived from broad 'operation' of city councils)
- Newberry v. Board of County Comm'rs of Fremont County, 919 P.2d 141 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1996) (recreation area interpretation includes facilities within recreation area)
- DiVenere v. University of Wyoming, 811 P.2d 273 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 1991) (stadium recreation area concept; ramps/concourse included in recreation area)
- Cottier v. City of Torrington, 145 P.3d 1274 (Wyoming Supreme Court, 2006) (close-ended immunity; context of statutes governing municipal liability)