Carlson v. Washington Ex Rel. Curtiss

Background

A contractor and his foreman were working on a planned ship canal connecting Lake Washington to Salmon Bay. Owners of lakeshore property sued in state court to stop removing an embankment that held the lake at its natural level. The state court announced and then entered an order forbidding the removal. The foreman had written notice of that order but helped blow out the embankment. He later said he acted under orders from a United States Army engineer, Captain Williams, who had signed a written contract with the contractor representing the State of Washington.

Reasoning

The main question was whether the War Department or federal law authorized the work and therefore protected the foreman from the state court’s order. The Court reviewed a long history of federal laws and reports about the canal project and concluded Congress had authorized only a federal lock at The Narrows, not excavation that would lower Lake Washington. The 1910 law expressly left responsibility for excavating and for claims from changed water levels to King County or other local agencies. The Court found that Captain Williams acted for the State’s project role and not as a federal officer empowered to alter the lake’s level. Because no federal authorization existed, the foreman could not claim immunity and the contempt judgment was upheld.

Real world impact

The decision confirms that local contractors and officials — not the federal government — bear responsibility for lowering the lake and for any resulting harm when the statutes leave excavation and liability to local agencies. It protects lakeshore owners from unauthorized lowering of water levels and leaves final responsibility with state or local authorities rather than the federal government.