Lawyers argue who is responsible for boy's death in bear attack Surrounded by dark wooden walls and bare benches, attorneys argued the finer points of "should" and "shall" in the case of a boy who was dragged into the woods and killed by a bear. U.S. attorneys said in court Wednesday that the federal government is not responsible for the death of Samuel Ives, the 11-year-old Pleasant Grove boy who was dragged from his tent late at night on Father's Day 2007 and then killed by a black bear. Ives's family is asking for at least $2.1 million for his death. The family has filed suit in both federal and state courts against both governments, claiming that they should have been warned of an attack that morning by the same bear on another camper. The black bear was classified as a Level III animal after the initial attack -- which means that it should be euthanized. Wildlife officials did attempt to find the bear after its first appearance but were unsuccessful. On Wednesday, arguments in the federal case centered around legal specifics as to how the Forest Service reacts to hazards. Federal policy is that they "should" assist state wildlife officials in the event of a dangerous bear. That word -- should -- allows for discretionary action on the part of the federal agency and frees them from blame in specific instances such as the bear attack, said assistant U.S. attorney Amy Oliver....