-
307 F.2d 99·
9th Cir.·
1962-08-08
·cited 84×
The dissenting judge believes that the accrual of a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act is governed by state law, not federal law.
-
745 F.2d 239·
3d Cir.·
1984-09-28
·cited 45×
The court held that the discretionary function exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act bars claims against the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for its decisions regarding investigation, information dissemination, and licensing, as these actions involve policy judgments and regulat
-
887 F.2d 1046·
10th Cir.·
1989-10-17
·cited 43×
The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and its exceptions bar claims against the United States and its employees for defamation and tortious interference with contract rights, even after substitution of the United States as the defendant.
-
677 F.2d 174·
1st Cir.·
1982-05-10
·cited 41×
The court held that the alleged promises made by the FDIC were too indefinite to support a claim of promissory estoppel, and that the appellants' action sounded in tort and was barred by the Federal Tort Claims Act.
-
614 F.2d 188·
9th Cir.·
1979-11-29
·cited 38×
The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act requires consideration of state law regarding private person liability, and the government cannot be held liable for negligent inspection without satisfying the elements of the applicable state's good Samaritan doctrine, such as rel
-
382 F.2d 594·
2d Cir.·
1967-09-07
·cited 36×
An unsuccessful bidder lacks standing to challenge an FHA auction, and claims sounding in tort are barred by the Federal Tort Claims Act, including those for misrepresentation or interference with contract rights.
-
912 F.2d 628·
3d Cir.·
1990-08-21
·cited 34×
A § 1983 claim for reinstatement can be brought against a state official in her official capacity, and damage claims can be brought against her in her individual capacity. A private party cannot be held liable under § 1983 for conspiring with a state official if the official was
-
194 F.2d 145·
D.C. Cir.·
1951-11-29
·cited 34×
-
872 F.2d 190·
7th Cir.·
1989-04-07
·cited 32×
The court held that a claim for severe mental distress inflicted during custodial interrogation, even if not rising to the level of a Fourth Amendment violation, can be actionable under the Due Process Clause.
-
581 F.2d 390·
4th Cir.·
1978-07-19
·cited 25×
The dissenting judge believes the government should not escape liability based on the personal immunity of its officers, as the FTCA amendment waived sovereign immunity without conditioning it on the absence of officer immunity.
-
489 F.2d 829·
7th Cir.·
1973-12-06
·cited 25×
Federal agencies are subject to suit under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1982 for damages, and the Federal Tort Claims Act does not preclude such suits. The statute of limitations for claims against federal agencies runs from the cessation of discriminatory conduct or contract performanc
-
676 F.2d 295·
8th Cir.·
1982-04-23
·cited 24×
The dissenting judge believes the "intentional torts" exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act bars the plaintiff's recovery because the underlying acts complained of fall within the statutory exceptions.
-
398 F.2d 77·
1st Cir.·
1968-07-11
·cited 24×
The court held that the Coast Guard's actions in determining vessel stability standards fell under the discretionary function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act, barring the suit.
-
581 F.2d 669·
7th Cir.·
1978-08-03
·cited 22×
A claim against federal officials for damages based on alleged constitutional violations resulting in death survives for the benefit of the decedent's estate, and is governed by federal common law, not state survival statutes.
-
557 F.2d 300·
2d Cir.·
1977-05-25
·cited 20×
The court held that New York's one-year limitations period for actions against sheriffs does not apply to federal law enforcement officers, and that the single publication rule does not bar claims based on separate publications of defamatory material. The court also held that a c
-
594 F.2d 1154·
7th Cir.·
1979-03-27
·cited 18×
The Federal Tort Claims Act does not waive sovereign immunity for intentional torts committed against servicemen where the injuries arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to service, even after amendments to the Act.
-
788 F.2d 395·
6th Cir.·
1986-04-18
·cited 17×
The court held that the plaintiff's wrongful death action was properly dismissed because the decedent's death was incident to military service, barring recovery under the Feres doctrine, and because the claim arose from an assault and battery, falling under the FTCA's intentional
-
777 F.2d 999·
5th Cir.·
1985-12-04
·cited 15×
Federal prisoners must exhaust administrative remedies before filing a Bivens action for damages, even if punitive damages are sought.
-
281 F.2d 596·
4th Cir.·
1960-08-19
·cited 14×
The United States is liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for damages caused by a negligent FHA appraisal, even though the claim involves misrepresentation, because the government assumed a specific duty to the purchaser which it negligently performed.
-
637 F.2d 694·
9th Cir.·
1981-01-26
·cited 13×
The court held that the Cunninghams abandoned their membership in OGA and that the sale of OGA's land was valid.
-
732 F.2d 366·
4th Cir.·
1984-04-16
·cited 12×
The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act waives sovereign immunity for negligent supervision by government medical personnel, even when the direct perpetrator's actions fall outside the scope of employment, and that the claim arose from medical malpractice, not assault and
-
720 F.2d 1451·
9th Cir.·
1983-11-28
·cited 10×
The court held that the magistrate's finding of no proximate cause for the alleged damage by Dr. Lee was not clearly erroneous, and therefore, the claim should not be reversed.
-
630 F.2d 523·
7th Cir.·
1980-09-12
·cited 10×
The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the complaint and denial of leave to amend, holding that the claims fell within the discretionary function exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act and that the administrative claims lacked allegations of operational negligence
-
338 F.2d 416·
2d Cir.·
1964-11-16
·cited 10×
The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to annul a conviction or entertain a tort claim against the government based on misrepresentation.
-
611 F.2d 1257·
9th Cir.·
1980-01-03
·cited 9×
The court held that the plaintiff did not establish a prima facie case of false imprisonment under Arizona law because his detention was pursuant to valid legal process.
-
706 F.2d 278·
8th Cir.·
1983-05-20
·cited 8×
The court held that the Perrys' counterclaims were barred by sovereign immunity and affirmed the district court's dismissal.
-
612 F.2d 61·
2d Cir.·
1979-12-06
·cited 8×
The Court held that the availability of a remedy under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) does not preempt a Bivens action for damages against federal officers for constitutional violations.
-
402 F.2d 168·
3d Cir.·
1968-10-25
·cited 8×
The court held that the plaintiff's complaint failed to state a claim for tortious conversion under the Federal Tort Claims Act because the use of the plans was with the plaintiff's consent, and any claim based on misrepresentation or deceit is barred by statute.
-
194 F.2d 689·
3d Cir.·
1952-02-12
·cited 8×
The court held that the shooting, found to be excessive force, constituted an assault and battery, which is an exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act, and that even if considered negligence, the plaintiff's own actions constituted contributory negligence under New Jersey law.
-
661 F.2d 740·
9th Cir.·
1981-11-16
·cited 7×
The court held that the government is not liable under the Tort Claims Act for damages arising from a commercial decision based on misrepresentation, even if the misrepresentation was made by a government agent.
-
838 F. Supp. 1561·
M.D. Fla.·
1993-11-19
·cited 6×
The court held that claims of negligence and defamation against the United States under the FTCA are dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, but claims for malicious continuation of prosecution and false imprisonment against federal investigative officers may proceed.
-
866 F.2d 276·
8th Cir.·
1989-02-06
·cited 6×
The court held that the bank's letters to FmHA satisfied the administrative claim notice requirement under the FTCA. The court reversed the dismissal and remanded for the district court to consider the misrepresentation exception.
-
666 F.2d 1061·
6th Cir.·
1981-12-24
·cited 6×
The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act's discretionary function exception barred claims based on the FAA's failure to promulgate specific crashworthiness regulations and its decision to delegate inspection duties to manufacturers.
-
913 F.2d 1382·
9th Cir.·
1990-09-07
·cited 4×
The court held that the United States is not estopped from seeking reimbursement for an erroneous payment and that the Fowlers' negligence counterclaim against the government is barred by the misrepresentation exception. However, a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding
-
862 F.2d 201·
9th Cir.·
1988-11-29
·cited 4×
The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as the claims were barred by the misrepresentation and discretionary function exceptions to the Federal Tort Claims Act.
-
651 F. Supp. 221·
N.D. Fla.·
1986-12-24
·cited 3×
The court held that the government's decision not to apply safety regulations was a discretionary function protected by the FTCA, and claims based on misrepresentation or failure to warn were barred.
-
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.
-
932 F.2d 891·
10th Cir.·
1991-05-07
·cited 2×
The court held that the Department of the Interior's initial approval of the lease was invalid due to NEPA non-compliance, meaning Sangre never acquired a vested property interest, thus precluding a Fifth Amendment takings claim. The court also held the United States was not liab
-
809 F.2d 1435·
9th Cir.·
1987-02-12
·cited 2×
The court held that the Association's claims for loss of pay and benefits by shoreside employees do not constitute maritime liens and therefore cannot subordinate the United States' preferred ship's mortgage.
-
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.
-
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.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-09-08
The court held that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the Campaign Defendants and subject matter jurisdiction over the United States, thus dismissing all claims.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-06-01
The court held that the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies for claims based on lack of informed consent, and that while jurisdiction existed for intentional tort claims, those claims failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-04-28
The court held that the United States is liable for battery, assault, false imprisonment, false arrest, and malicious prosecution by a VA police officer, and awarded damages for pain and suffering and time in jail.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2019-09-25
The court held that the abuse of process claim failed for lack of post-issuance misuse and the civil rights claim was barred by sovereign immunity.
-
987 F.2d 1365·
8th Cir.·
1993-03-15
The court held that a civilian's claim for legal malpractice against the military is not barred by the Feres doctrine or the genesis test, and is not precluded by the FTCA's misrepresentation exception.
-
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.
-
928 F.2d 176·
5th Cir.·
1991-04-11
The court held that the insurers' claim against the United States for negligent approval of respiratory equipment was barred by the misrepresentation exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act because the claim's causal chain depended on the dissemination of misinformation.