TEXARKANA -- A federal judge wants lawyers involved in civil lawsuits stemming from the deadly 2010 Albert Pike flood to answer three questions.
At a hearing Friday morning in Texarkana's downtown federal building, U.S. District Judge Susan Hickey discussed 11 cases pending against the U.S. government. The cases were put on hold last year as the federal court waited for the Arkansas Supreme Court to define the word malicious as it is used in the Arkansas Recreational Use Statute.
The state's highest court answered the question in a way that was hailed as a victory by lawyers representing family members of victims and survivors of the June 11, 2010, flood that took the lives of 20 campers. The government claims in motions to dismiss that the statute provides immunity from the suits. The plaintiffs' lawyers argue malicious conduct, as it is used in the statute concerning exceptions to immunity, includes action taken in reckless disregard of the consequences.
The Supreme Court agreed with the plaintiffs' definition in an opinion handed down in April.
But the definition doesn't address all points raised in motions to dismiss filed by the government in the cases. On Friday, Hickey told the lawyers she wants several questions answered before she rules on the government's motions.
First, Hickey wants to know how the plaintiffs believe the government acted maliciously. Second, Hickey wants to know if an ultrahazardous condition existed at Albert Pike as is required in the exception to immunity in the statute. Third, Hickey asked the lawyers to explain why the plaintiffs believe the government knew of the condition and how it failed to warn of it.
Hickey said she believes "limited discovery" will be needed for the lawyers to address her questions concerning immunity or an exception to it under the statute. Discovery is the exchange of evidence between opposing sides in a suit and can include documents and/or testimony.
On June 11, 2010, as campers slept, the Little Missouri River in Ouachita National Forest rose from about 3 feet to more than 23 feet in a matter of hours. Picnic tables, cars, recreational vehicles, pavement and people were swept away in the roiling waters.
The cases allege the government is liable because the campgrounds were built within the 100-year floodplain, no warning signs were posted despite U.S. Forest Service regulations requiring such signs, problems with communications equipment -- which were known to the Forest Service -- went uncorrected, and volunteer hosts were untrained and thus unprepared for the fatal flood.
Metro on 06/10/2014