-
284 F.2d 456·
7th Cir.·
1960-11-23
·cited 4×
The court held that certain costs associated with converting equipment to a new electrical current and the award of interest from the date of the original, non-final judgment were improperly included in the damages awarded to the plaintiff.
-
239 F.2d 679·
9th Cir.·
1956-12-27
·cited 4×
The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction over the Finns' counterclaim because the United States had not waived its sovereign immunity, and that the district court erred in granting affirmative relief to defendants who had not properly filed counterclaims or cros
-
210 F.2d 123·
6th Cir.·
1954-02-08
·cited 4×
The United States government was negligent in its operation of Dam 41 and its failure to adequately warn small boats of the dangerous conditions created by open wickets, making it liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
-
182 F.2d 296·
1st Cir.·
1950-05-22
·cited 4×
The court held that a summary judgment cannot be granted without proof of the claim, even if the defendant's answers are evasive.
-
778 F.2d 1552·
11th Cir.·
1986-01-02
·cited 3×
-
956 F.2d 383·
2d Cir.·
1992-02-03
·cited 2×
The court held that New York law applies to the third-party claim because the 1834 Compact grants New York exclusive jurisdiction over Ellis Island, including areas expanded by landfill. This allows for contribution claims against the employer under New York law.
-
936 F.2d 956·
7th Cir.·
1991-07-10
·cited 2×
The court held that the plaintiffs' claims against the government were barred by the misrepresentation exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act because their injuries stemmed directly from reliance on the government's inaccurate approval of construction materials.
-
923 F.2d 765·
9th Cir.·
1991-01-24
·cited 2×
The court held that the Federal Air Surgeon's decision to issue a special medical certificate was a discretionary function shielded by the FTCA, and thus the district court lacked jurisdiction.
-
913 F.2d 858·
11th Cir.·
1990-06-14
·cited 2×
The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment, holding that the ASCS committee's decision to use the historical method for reconstituting crop allotments fell under the discretionary function exception of the FTCA.
-
849 F.2d 452·
9th Cir.·
1988-06-17
·cited 2×
This court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the district court's jurisdiction was based in part on the Little Tucker Act, vesting exclusive appellate jurisdiction in the Federal Circuit.
-
835 F.2d 1133·
5th Cir.·
1988-01-20
·cited 2×
The court held that the widow's claim against the United States for the Army's negligent processing of an insurance premium allotment form was not barred by the Federal Tort Claims Act's "interference with contract rights" exception.
-
831 F.2d 806·
8th Cir.·
1987-10-26
·cited 2×
The court held that the Customs Inspector's suggestion for one of the intoxicated individuals to drive did not create a special duty of care under Minnesota law, nor did it constitute an undertaking under the Good Samaritan doctrine, and was a discretionary function immune from l
-
647 F. Supp. 1521·
S.D. Fla.·
1986-11-19
·cited 2×
The court held that the United States is immune from liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act for claims arising from the detention of goods by law enforcement officers, and the Tucker Act claim failed due to exceeding the jurisdictional limit.
-
756 F.2d 497·
7th Cir.·
1985-02-27
·cited 2×
The dissenting judge would not reverse the trial court's dismissal, finding the plaintiff's claim to be a small matter of neglect.
-
735 F.2d 1012·
6th Cir.·
1984-06-11
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court's findings of fact regarding the permanency of injuries and the aggravation of pre-existing conditions were not supported by substantial evidence and were clearly erroneous.
-
690 F.2d 669·
8th Cir.·
1982-10-15
·cited 2×
The court held that jurisdiction was not established under the Federal Tort Claims Act because no private party liability exists under North Dakota law for the alleged negligent review of a loan application.
-
653 F.2d 726·
2d Cir.·
1980-07-16
·cited 2×
The court should not sua sponte create a trade secret misappropriation claim for a pro se litigant when such a claim was never raised and is unsupported by the record.
-
392 F.2d 858·
7th Cir.·
1968-02-09
·cited 2×
The government is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for a soldier's death-causing negligence if the soldier was not acting within the scope of his employment.
-
262 F.2d 211·
10th Cir.·
1958-12-19
·cited 2×
The court held that a tort claim against the United States under the Tort Claims Act cannot be joined with a contract claim against insurance companies.
-
506 F. Supp. 2d 1178·
M.D. Fla.·
2007-06-14
·cited 1×
The court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss based on untimeliness, finding the complaint was filed within the statute of limitations due to the mailbox rule, but deferred ruling on the applicability of the FTCA's § 2680(c) exception pending a Supreme Court decision.
-
403 F. Supp. 2d 1182·
S.D. Fla.·
2005-11-30
·cited 1×
The court held that the United States was liable under the FTCA for the negligence of its employees and Dr. Kushner, finding that Dr. Kushner was an employee for FTCA purposes and that his negligence, along with that of military personnel, caused the infant's injuries.
-
620 F. Supp. 270·
M.D. Fla.·
1985-09-18
·cited 1×
The FAA's medical certification process is a discretionary function excepted from the Federal Tort Claims Act, precluding liability for alleged negligence.
-
585 F. Supp. 256·
S.D. Fla.·
1984-04-16
·cited 1×
The court held that the plaintiffs' claims for false arrest and false imprisonment accrued on the date of their arrest, and because they failed to file their administrative claim within the two-year statutory period, the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
467 F.2d 1061·
10th Cir.·
1972-10-16
·cited 1×
The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act because their amended complaint lacked factual allegations to establish Sandia Corporation as an instrumentality of the United States and did not overcome statutory exceptions.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-12-08
The court held that the United States has not waived sovereign immunity for attorneys' fees and non-taxable costs under the FTCA or EAJA, even when state law would otherwise allow such an award.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-06-29
The court held that the plaintiff's Federal Tort Claims Act claim was time-barred because it was not presented to the agency within two years of accrual, and thus the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-10-05
The court held that the plaintiff's claims are barred by collateral estoppel and the statute of limitations, and thus the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2022-09-09
The court held that the plaintiff's medical malpractice claims were barred by Florida's statute of repose, and therefore, the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the action.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2022-03-22
Richard Triolo sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries sustained in a 2017 rear-end collision with a postal truck driven by a federal employee, claiming permanent lumbar spine injuries requiring surgery and ongoing pain management. The court found th
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-05-22
The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies as required by the Federal Tort Claims Act.
-
966 F.2d 346·
8th Cir.·
1992-05-26
The court held that the plaintiff's claims were not actionable under the FTCA or as a constitutional claim, and the district court lacked jurisdiction over the emotional distress claim.
-
947 F.2d 527·
1st Cir.·
1991-10-22
The court held that the plaintiff could not pursue a tort claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act because the pretrial stipulation exclusively limited the issues to constitutional claims, and the government's sovereign immunity was not waived without reference to Puerto Rico law.
-
929 F.2d 1202·
7th Cir.·
1991-04-11
The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act does not provide jurisdiction for Paul's claim because his assertions sound in contract or misrepresentation, which are excluded by statute.
-
887 F.2d 1230·
4th Cir.·
1989-10-23
The court held that the district court erred in basing a solatium award, in part, on a telephone call made almost a year after the decedent's death, as this was an intervening event not reasonably foreseeable and not the basis of a filed claim.
-
874 F.2d 201·
4th Cir.·
1989-05-08
The court held that claims arising under the Social Security Act are exclusively remediable under that Act, precluding actions under the Federal Tort Claims Act or for constitutional torts seeking monetary damages.
-
853 F.2d 124·
2d Cir.·
1988-08-02
The Eleventh Amendment does not bar federal jurisdiction over a third-party contribution claim brought by the United States against a state, even if the main action was commenced by a private citizen.
-
841 F.2d 851·
8th Cir.·
1988-03-11
The court held that VA hospital security guards are "investigative or law enforcement officers" under the FTCA, and that the magistrate's findings of fact regarding reasonable force and justification for detention were not clearly erroneous under Missouri law.
-
604 F.2d 1248·
9th Cir.·
1979-09-24
A motion for new trial is not required to preserve for appeal the issue of excessive damages in a non-jury trial under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The award of $900,000 for Renee Gregory's injuries was not excessive.
-
542 F.2d 1250·
5th Cir.·
1976-12-01
The court held that a soldier assigned housing and required to maintain the surrounding grounds was acting within the scope of his employment when he injured a child while mowing the lawn.
-
192 F.2d 411·
D.C. Cir.·
1951-07-19
The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act's exception for claims arising from the administration of the Trading with the Enemy Act barred the plaintiffs' suit against the United States.