## Facts

- In spring 1980, Mount St. Helens experienced escalating seismic activity and eruptions, culminating in a catastrophic eruption on May 18, 1980.
- The Governor declared a state of emergency under Washington emergency statutes and issued executive orders restricting access to areas near the volcano.
- Executive Order 80-05 created restricted “red” and “blue” zones; the town of Cougar, Washington, was placed in the red zone.
- Executive Order 80-08 later expanded the red zone and continued restrictions, generally limiting entry to government personnel, emergency responders, scientists, media, and certain owners or business persons by permit; later orders adjusted zone boundaries and terms.
- The Governor consulted scientists and monitored conditions through an organized watch group while modifying restrictions as conditions evolved.
- Cougar remained within the red zone for months and was removed in October 1980.
- A business owners association and member businesses alleged the emergency declaration was premature, Cougar was wrongly included, and the area was reopened too late, causing substantial economic losses.
- Plaintiffs sued the State, the Governor, and two associated individuals for damages; the trial court granted summary judgment for defendants.

## Issues

1. Whether a post-event civil damages suit is a proper vehicle to challenge the Governor’s emergency declaration and access restrictions imposed during a disaster response.
2. Whether the Governor’s emergency-zone decisions were discretionary acts within statutory authority, insulating them from collateral attack via damages claims.

## Decision

- The Washington Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for the State, the Governor, and the other defendants.
- The court held the challenged emergency decisions were lawful exercises of statutory authority and discretionary in nature.
- The court concluded a damages action brought months later could not be used to collaterally attack the wisdom or timing of those emergency measures.

## Legal Principles

- When statutes authorize the Governor to declare an emergency and impose necessary restrictions to protect life and property, decisions implementing that authority commonly require judgment under uncertain, rapidly changing conditions.
- Executive actions involving policy choice and risk assessment in emergency management are discretionary governmental functions.
- Discretionary emergency decisions taken within statutory authority are not subject to collateral attack through later tort-style damages suits challenging their timing, scope, or duration.

## Conclusion

The court treated the Governor’s eruption-response orders as discretionary, statutorily authorized emergency measures and held that affected businesses could not obtain damages by retrospectively challenging the inclusion of Cougar in restricted zones or the timing of reopening decisions.


Cougar Bus. Owners Ass'n v. State, 97 Wn.2d 466, 647 P.2d 481 (Wash. 1982)