Opinion ID: 1190662
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: legislative intent as to sec. 4706

Text: Several inferences are to be drawn from the foregoing paragraph discussion. First, the cases of Bruenn v. Northern Yakima School Dist. No. 7, 101 Wash. 374, 172 Pac. 569 (1918); Kelley v. School Dist. No. 71, 102 Wash. 343, 173 Pac. 333 (1918), and Holt v. School Dist. No. 71, 102 Wash. 442, 173 Pac. 335 (1918), referred to by Judge Main as pending at the inception of the legislative session in 1917, all involved situations wherein school districts were being sued because of injuries to school students occurring in the course of use by such students of some so-called athletic apparatus or appliance. To phrase it another way, in each case, there was a user of an instrumentality by a student. The student was an actor, actively using some playground instrumentality. The injuries complained of were caused by, and resulted directly from, contact with and use or operation by a plaintiff-student of some school playground instrumentality. Secondly, one further factor might be considered at this point, both with reference to Judge Main's observation and with reference to the 1917 enactment of § 4706. School people at the time were somewhat concerned about potential legal liabilities inherent in the then apparently expanding physical education, athletic and vocational training programs of school districts. There had been some accidents and some law suits, as evidenced by the three cases then pending in the supreme court and other cases mentioned heretofore. In this connection, the following article appeared in the Morning Olympian, Wednesday, March 7, 1917, page 4: