Thunder Hawk v. Union Pac. R.R. - 844 P.2d 1045 (Wyo. 1992)

Rule:

The party moving for summary judgment bears the initial burden of establishing a prima facie case for a summary judgment. If the movant carries this burden, the party opposing the summary judgment must come forward with specific facts to demonstrate that a genuine issue of material fact does exist.

Facts:

Alexander Thunder Hawk, Jr., a six-year-old child, suffered a traumatic below-the-knee amputation of his left leg when a stopped train on which he was playing began to move. The child, by and through his guardian ad litem and conservators, filed an action against the railroad for negligent, grossly negligent, and willful and wanton misconduct. The child's parents joined the action by asserting claims for the child’s medical expenses and for their own emotional trauma. The district court granted summary judgments in favor of the railroad. Plaintiffs challenged the district court’s order. 

Issue:

Was the grant of summary judgment in favor of the railroad warranted under the circumstances? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

On appeal, the court held that issues of material fact existed as to whether the child realized the danger of playing near the trains in light of the child's learning disabilities. Thus, the district court erred by granting a summary judgment adverse to the child's claims that the railroad owed a duty of reasonable care to him under the attractive nuisance doctrine. The district court also erred when it found the railroad did not act in a willful or wanton disregard for the child's safety. The child submitted sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact concerning the railroad's safety policy.