Suing the Federal Government
description
Transcript of Suing the Federal Government
![Page 1: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Suing the Federal Government
Federal Tort Claims Act
![Page 2: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
History
Traditional Sovereign Immunity "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury,
but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law." U.S. Const. art. I, § 9.
5th Amendment – “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
All other compensation had to be by private bills What problems do private bills pose?
![Page 3: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Court of Claims
1855 Contracts, tax refunds, takings - not torts Administrative tribunal to review claims and make
recommendations to Congress Later Congress made the decisions binding Not an Art III court Like bankruptcy courts
Appeal to the Federal circuit and the United States Supreme Court
![Page 4: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Federal Tort Claims Act
Went into effect in 1945 All torts were private bills before then Tied up Congress and encouraged corruption
Established a compensation system for negligence claims Looks to the law of the state where the incident
occurred for the legal standard of care We will discuss the procedure under the FTCA later.
![Page 5: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Construction of Statutes in Derogation of Immunity
The Constitution only provides for compensation for takings of private property for public use.
All other compensation is governed by statute. Even Bivens actions are constitutionally required
under current case law (2013) If the plaintiff fails to state a claim under the statute,
or fails to comply with the statutory procedure, then immunity is not abrogated and there is no jurisdiction for the claim.
![Page 6: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Dalehite v. U.S., 346 U.S. 15 (1953)
Texas City Disaster http://www.local1259iaff.org/disaster.html
Why is the TVA producing ammonium nitrate fertilizer? What are other uses of ammonium nitrate?
Where is it going in 1947?
![Page 7: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
The General Claim
The negligence charged was that the United States, without definitive investigation of Fertilizer Grade Ammonium Nitrate (FGAN) properties, shipped or permitted shipment to a congested area without warning of the possibility of explosion under certain conditions.
The District Court accepted this theory. A pattern in these cases – the local judge is hard
pressed to deny compensation
![Page 8: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Specific Findings by the Trial Court
the Government had been careless in drafting and adopting the fertilizer export plan as a whole,
specific negligence in various phases of the manufacturing process, and
those which emphasized official dereliction of duty in failing to police the shipboard loading.
![Page 9: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
The Statutory Defense
(a) Any claim based upon an act or omission of an employee of the Government, exercising due care, in the execution of a statute or regulation, whether or not such statute or regulation be valid, or based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty on the part of a federal agency or an employee of the Government, whether or not the discretion involved be abused.
![Page 10: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
What is the Intent of this Provision?
What is a discretionary function? Why do we limit claims based on government
decisionmaking? What are the consequences for allowing litigants to
challenge government polices? How does this mirror juridical review of rules and
adjudications? What is the remedy for bad decisions? What about compensation?
![Page 11: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
The Supreme Court View of Discretion
So we know that the draftsmen did not intend it to relieve the Government from liability for such common-law torts as an automobile collision caused by the negligence of an employee ... of the administering agency. We know it was intended to cover more than the administration of a statute or regulation because it appears disjunctively in the second phrase of the section. The "discretion" protected by the section is not that of the judge -- a power to decide within the limits of positive rules of law subject to judicial review. It is the discretion of the executive or the administrator to act according to one's judgment of the best course, a concept of substantial historical ancestry in American law
![Page 12: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Allen v. United States, 816 F.2d 1417 (10th Cir. 1987) - This Clears up the Cloud
How did the government put these people at risk? Did the government deny that it caused any
injuries? Was this an accident? What did the government intend to do? What is the discretionary authority issue and how
was it resolved? What do you do if you do not like this?
![Page 13: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
FTCA Procedure
![Page 14: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Causes of Action under the FTCA - Sec 2672
The head of each Federal agency ... may consider, ascertain, adjust, determine, compromise, and settle any claim for money damages against the United States for injury or loss of property or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the agency
while acting within the scope of his office or employment, under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant
in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred
![Page 15: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Limitations on Liability - Sec 2674 The United States shall be liable, respecting the provisions of this
title relating to tort claims, in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances, but shall not be liable for interest prior to judgment or for punitive damages.
If, however, in any case wherein death was caused, the law of the place where the act or omission complained of occurred provides, or has been construed to provide, for damages only punitive in nature, the United States shall be liable for actual or compensatory damages, measured by the pecuniary injuries resulting from such death to the persons respectively, for whose benefit the action was brought, in lieu thereof.
![Page 16: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Exceptions to the FTCA - § 28 USC Sec 2680
http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/immunity/ftca_exceptions.htm
(h) originally did not include the provision for law enforcement officers.
![Page 17: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)
Bivens recognized that there is a direct action against federal employees for violations of constitutional rights Bivens is a personal action, not an official
capacity action Why might you use Bivens rather than state tort
remedy against the officer?
![Page 18: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
2680(h) - intentional torts by police officers - revised after Bivens
Has become a substitute for a Bivens action for covered officers. When would a Bivens action still be possible? When would an ordinary tort action be
possible? A recent case allows a Bivens action against
federal medical personnel in a detention center.
![Page 19: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Administrative Procedural Requirements - Sec 2675
An action shall not be instituted upon a claim against the United States for money damages for injury or loss of property or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment, unless the claimant shall have first presented the claim to the appropriate Federal agency and his claim shall have been finally denied by the agency in writing and sent by certified or registered mail.
Form 95 - FTCA claims form Alternatives to Form 95
![Page 20: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
What if the Agency Does Not Act on the Claim?
The failure of an agency to make final disposition of a claim within six months after it is filed shall, at the option of the claimant any time thereafter, be deemed a final denial of the claim for purposes of this section.
![Page 21: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Filing a Claim is Jurisdictional This is an administrative compensation scheme, so it is subject to
exhaustion of remedies You must file a claim with the agency with 2 years of the
accidence You can only go to court after the agency rules on the claim or
after six months "The failure of an agency to make final disposition of a claim
within six months after it is filed shall, at the option of the claimant any time thereafter, be deemed a final denial of the claim for purposes of this section."
If you do not comply with this requirement, your case will be dismissed and if the 2 years has elapsed, you will be prescribed.
![Page 22: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Berkovitz by Berkovitz v. U.S., 486 U.S. 531 (1988)
![Page 23: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Berkovitz by Berkovitz v. U.S., 486 U.S. 531 (1988)
What was the product in Berkovitz? What did the FDA regulations require? What did the plaintiffs claim the FDA failed
to do? What was the FDA’s defense?
![Page 24: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Varig Airlines (in Berkovitz)
What was the injury in Varig Airlines? What did the enabling act require the agency
to do? What did the regs require? How are the regs in Berkovitz different from
those in Varig Airlines?
![Page 25: Suing the Federal Government](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062305/568162b6550346895dd33efb/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Agency Liability
Why was the FDA liable in Berkovitz? How could the FDA have worded the
regulations to avoid this sort of liability? Why might that have raised a red flag during
notice and comment?