Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ut-sally.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!ut-sally!riddle
From: riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle)
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.movies
Subject: Re: Karen Silkwood
Message-ID: <767@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 14-Jan-84 21:54:51 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.767
Posted: Sat Jan 14 21:54:51 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Jan-84 07:28:49 EST
References: <15308@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 33

Meg (Crockett.PA@PARC-MAXC.ARPA) reports:

 >> The Supreme Court today overruled the Oklahoma State Court decision in a
 >> suit by Karen Silkwood's father and children against Kerr-Magee (sp?)
 >> owners of the Plutonium plant where she worked prior to her accidental
 >> (?) death in 1974 at the age of 28.  The award was based on the
 >> contamination she received while working there as a technician.  The
 >> vote was 5 to 4 to award the children $10M.  (For some technical reason
 >> this reverts back to the state court, so the actual amount may end up
 >> being less.)  However, the Supreme Court declared that Kerr-Magee had
 >> acted "wantonly and recklessly" in this matter.

A couple of comments (I would appreciate corrections or clarifications from
anyone who is less hazy on the details than I):

I recall hearing in a constitutional law class this semester that several of
the Supreme Court justices became visibly angry upon hearing Kerr-McGee's 
lawyers present their case.  Kerr-McGee asserted that because of a law
restricting the liability of the nuclear industry in case of nuclear accidents,
any claim for damages made by any of their workers was illegitimate on its
face, regardless of proof of negligence.  (The legislation was passed in the
infancy of the nuclear industry because no insurance company would cover its
unknown but presumably high risks.  This was its first test in court.)  The
recent ruling essentially said that Congress may not pass a law which puts a
group like the nuclear industry above the law.

The case reverts to the lower court because of a very basic judicial principle:
the Supreme Court rules on points of law, not on individual cases.  When they
overturn a ruling, the case always goes back for a retrial.
----
Prentiss Riddle
("Aprendiz de todo, maestro de nada.")
{ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddle