Knowledge (XXG)

Feres v. United States

Source đź“ť

525:
the outcome of any damages suit--both with respect to liability and the amount of damages--is hazardous, whereas veterans' benefits are guaranteed by law.' The law is often unfair when viewed from the perspective of any one individual. Unfairness, however, must often be tolerated if we are to devise, implement, and maintain a system of laws whose application is certain and just in the grand scheme of things. Whether the Feres doctrine can be described as such is, we feel, open to question in certain cases. However, any final determination of its justness must be left to a higher authority than this Court. We therefore AFFIRM the district court's dismissal of Appellant's cause of action.
39: 359:
his stomach. The complaint alleged that it was negligently left there by the army surgeon. The District Court, being doubtful of the law, refused without prejudice the Government's pretrial motion to dismiss the complaint. After trial, finding negligence as a fact, Judge Chesnut carefully reexamined the issue of law and concluded that the Act does not charge the United States with liability in this type of case. The Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, affirmed dismissal of the case.
634:“Perhaps the Court is hesitant to take up this issue at all because it would require fiddling with a 70-year old precedent that is demonstrably wrong. But if the Feres doctrine is so wrong that that we cannot figure out how to rein it in, then the better answer is to bid it farewell. There is precedent for that approach. We should follow it.” Justice Clarance Thomas dissenting (Pg. 3, 593 U.S _ 2021) 631:
invoking the Federal Torts Claims Act, but was dismissed by the district court under the Feres Doctrine. After an appeals court affirmed the dismissal of the lower court, Jane Doe asked the Supreme Court to overrule the Feres Doctrine, but the petition was denied. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented, criticizing the doctrine and the Courts unwillingness to overrule wrongly decided cases:
700:, a Coast Guard helicopter pilot was killed when Federal Aviation Administration air traffic controllers assumed positive radar control over the helicopter during a rescue mission and caused the aircraft to crash into the side of a mountain on the Hawaiian island of Molakai. The United States escaped liability relying on 721:, the U.S. 9th District Court of Appeals found that Schoenfeld, an active duty Marine at the time of his injury, could proceed with a lawsuit under the Federal Tort Claims Act due to the location and nature of his injury since Schoenfeld was doing what any member of the public could have done at the time. 366:
case: The District Court dismissed the complaint of Griggs' executrix, which alleged that while on active duty he met death because of negligent and unskillful medical treatment by army surgeons. The Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, reversed and, one judge dissenting, held that the complaint stated a
350:
case: The District Court dismissed an action by the executrix of Feres against the United States to recover for death caused by negligence. Decedent perished by fire in the barracks at Pine Camp, New York, while on active duty in service of the United States. Negligence was alleged in quartering him
358:
case: Plaintiff, while in the Army, was required to undergo an abdominal operation. About eight months later, in the course of another operation after plaintiff was discharged, a towel 30 inches long by 18 inches wide, marked "Medical Department U.S. Army," was discovered and removed from
524:
We take this opportunity to remind Appellant that, although the benefits he receives may not be as much as those received by other service members, the recovery of those benefits is 'swift efficient,' usually obviating the necessity for litigation. In addition, we must not forget that 'predicting
450:
The provision of the Act making "the law of the place where the act or omission occurred" govern any consequent liability is inconsistent with an intention to make the Government liable in the circumstances of these cases, since the relationship of the Government and members of its armed forces is
436:
One of the purposes of the Act was to transfer from Congress to the courts the burden of examining tort claims against the Government, and Congress was not burdened with private bills on behalf of military and naval personnel, because a comprehensive system of relief had been authorized by statute
630:
In 2021, the Supreme Court denied Certiorari in Jane Doe v. United States (3 May, 2021). This case concerned an unnamed plaintiff who was allegedly raped by a fellow cadet during her second year at West Point University. After exhausting administrative proceedings, Jane Doe sued the government by
454:
The failure of the Act to provide for any adjustment between the remedy provided therein and other established systems of compensation for injuries or death of those in the armed services is persuasive that the Tort Claims Act was not intended to be applicable in the circumstances of these
627:. The bill would have amended the Federal Torts Claims Act to allow claims for military members who are injured or killed due to negligent and wrongful acts in healthcare, except during military conflict from those who are employed by the U.S. Government; it did not pass. 298:
There have been exceptions to the Feres doctrine where active duty members have been allowed to sue for injuries when the court found that civilians could have been harmed in the same manner under the same circumstances in which the service member's injuries occurred.
1274: 637:
In 2019, Sergeant First Class Richard Stayskal, who was diagnosed with terminal lung cancer after military doctors noticed but failed to look into a growth in his lung on two separate occasions, testified before Congress about his ordeal. The result was the
2191: 2066: 1489: 288:
actions when a service member is killed or injured. The bar does not extend to killed or injured family members, so a spouse or child may still sue the United States for tort claims, nor does it bar service members from filing either
1481: 1449: 130:
The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) did not apply to claims by petitioner servicemen; respondent United States was not liable under the FTCA for injuries to servicemen arising out of or in the course of activity incident to
429:
The United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries to members of the armed forces sustained while on active duty and not on furlough and resulting from the negligence of others in the armed
591:
in August 2008 under Federal Tort Claims Act in California's Eastern (9th) Circuit District, which was reluctantly denied by District Judge John Mendez in February 2009. Mendez urged the Supreme Court to revisit the
440:
The Act confers on the district courts broad jurisdiction over "civil actions on claims against the United States, for money damages," but it remains for the courts to determine whether any claim is recognizable in
279:
effectively bars service members from collecting damages from the United States Government for personal injuries experienced in the performance of their duties. It also bars families of service members from filing
1902: 541: 351:
in barracks known or which should have been known to be unsafe because of a defective heating plant, and in failing to maintain an adequate fire watch. The Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, dismissed the case.
2247: 2151: 433:
The Tort Claims Act should be construed to fit, so far as will comport with its words, into the entire statutory system of remedies against the Government to make a workable, consistent, and equitable whole.
639: 1894: 2603: 1497: 1182: 1854: 1846: 1473: 1174: 2593: 2588: 2386: 1290: 310: 741: 557: 560:. In October 2003, Airman SSGT. Dean P. Witt was admitted to David Grant Medical Center for a routine appendectomy while he was on approved furlough to finalize his transfer from 2279: 1158: 1020: 872: 678: 655: 447:
There is no analogous liability of a "private individual" growing out of "like circumstances" when the relationship of the wronged to the wrongdoers in these cases is considered.
80: 1830: 1521: 497: 2159: 1142: 623:
introduced the Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical Accountability Act of 2009, an amended version of a bill from 2008. In 2010, Hinchey re-introduced the amended bill in the
508:
of the sailboat he was navigating due to improper training and inclement weather. Miller sustained further damage when he was unable to be immediately rescued because the
964: 1758: 1335: 553: 512:'s boat overseeing the exercise was inoperable and those assigned to watch the trainees were working on the boat. Subsequent to the accident, Miller was admitted to the 2271: 1327: 1774: 1091: 580:, forcing life-saving oxygen to be pumped into his stomach, instead of his lungs, and then utilized a pediatric medical device to try and save him, resulting in an 383:
Does the Federal Tort Claim Act (FTCA), construed to fit, so far as will comport with its words into the entire statutory system of remedies against the Government?
1537: 1870: 1678: 444:
It does not create new causes of action, but merely accepts for the Government liability under circumstances that would bring private liability into existence.
1878: 1505: 1150: 603:
In May 2010, Witt's wife appealed the Ninth Circuit's decision and in January 2011, Witt's wife filed for petition for writ of certiorari. In February 2011,
513: 303: 989: 2608: 1569: 1352: 607:
were filed in support of Witt's appeal. However, the Supreme Court refused to hear the case and the petition for certiorari was denied on June 27, 2011.
1782: 620: 2598: 2351: 2263: 2583: 1347: 516:
in Bethesda, Maryland, where he was told he had no physiological injuries, only to learn subsequently that he had suffered a fractured neck and
2050: 1079: 624: 1529: 1298: 1194: 398:
Does the "act or omission" resulting in negligence and liability apply in the relationship of the Government to members of its armed forces?
2295: 1790: 1634: 731: 1369: 2508: 1417: 1213: 2183: 1585: 1126: 1088: 250: 43: 2441: 401:
Does FTCA provide a remedial adjustment for other established systems of compensation for injuries and death in the armed services?
646:
on December 20 of that year, which created an administrative process for the filing and resolution of medical malpractice claims.
395:
Is the Government in a position of being analogous to the liability of a "private individual" growing out of "like circumstances"?
1545: 504:. Leonce J. Miller, III brought suit against the United States government after he was knocked overboard and unconscious by the 1886: 1577: 1105: 2223: 2175: 1513: 1425: 295:
on their child's behalf or filing for wrongful death or loss of consortium as a companion claim to a spouse or child's suit.
2255: 1984: 1609: 1593: 1282: 696:
analysis does not have to be a member of the armed forces, but can be any civilian employee of the federal government. In
407:
Is the dismissal of the Jefferson case at the District Court and affirmed by the Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit correct?
2287: 2199: 1670: 1393: 1319: 1310: 386:
Was the purpose of Federal Tort Claims Act to transfer from Congress to the courts the burden of examining tort claims?
1968: 1409: 1385: 501: 108:
On writs of certiorari to the Courts of Appeals for the Second, Fourth, and Tenth Circuits, 339 U.S. 910, 339 U.S. 951
520:
damage. For nearly four years, Miller was unable to walk unassisted. The Court personally addressed Miller, stating:
2524: 1726: 1601: 1205: 1072: 2335: 1694: 410:
Is the cause of action under FTCA as affirmed by the Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, in the Griggs case correct?
389:
The Act confers on the district courts broad jurisdiction, but does this apply to any claim recognizable at law?
2556: 2327: 1976: 1766: 1734: 1441: 1221: 953:
House Report 111-466- 111th Congress-Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical Accountability Act of 2009 (2009-2010).
343:, as to which Courts of Appeals are in conflict, makes it appropriate to consider three cases in one opinion. 1862: 459: 415: 2540: 2532: 2469: 2111: 1750: 1742: 1561: 1258: 549: 340: 254: 236: 1049: 568:, California. Prior to post-op, and shortly following surgery, a military nurse anesthetist re-inserted an 2303: 2021: 1718: 1457: 1377: 1134: 2410: 2311: 2143: 1838: 1822: 1798: 1702: 1662: 1065: 1024: 876: 718: 682: 565: 72: 588: 249:, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), combined three pending federal cases for a hearing in certiorari in which the 1031: 404:
Is the ruling in the Feres case, dismissing the cause of action at the District Court level correct?
261:
and resulting from the negligence of others in the armed forces. The opinion is an extension of the
2127: 2103: 2013: 1960: 1646: 1433: 1117: 581: 561: 162: 62:
Feres, Executrix, v. United States, Jefferson v. United States; United States v. Griggs, Executrix
2516: 2402: 2359: 2215: 2095: 1996: 1814: 1654: 1553: 1249: 509: 285: 269: 186: 174: 2548: 2416: 2394: 2378: 2343: 2319: 2074: 1910: 1806: 1710: 1361: 1229: 1166: 685: 569: 178: 166: 20: 1275:
Black & White Taxicab & Transfer Co. v. Brown & Yellow Taxicab & Transfer Co.
2453: 1918: 1465: 1237: 517: 291: 2500: 2461: 2207: 2167: 2119: 1686: 1057: 616: 309:
The effect of the doctrine was substantially limited by a change in the law made by the
2231: 2192:
Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church & State
2135: 2086: 2058: 1939: 1266: 1040: 505: 281: 198: 146: 879: 257:
for injuries to members of the armed forces sustained while on active duty and not on
16:
United States Supreme Court case that bars FTCA claims for members of the armed forces
2577: 2042: 2005: 604: 965:"Soldier with cancer fights to change law shielding military from malpractice suits" 302:
Injuries experienced by service members while on active duty are covered by various
2239: 643: 190: 990:"Fort Bragg soldier's medical malpractice case makes way in annual federal budget" 584:
that left him in a vegetative state. Witt died 3 months later on January 9, 2004.
75: 313:, which created an administrative process to hear claims of medical malpractice. 1490:
C & L Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma
2067:
Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City
732:"New Law Permits Military Members To Seek Settlements For Medical Malpractice" 371: 265: 154: 91: 1482:
College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board
1450:
Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma
573: 2033: 1951: 258: 577: 262: 1903:
Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & Mfg.
87: 19:"Feres doctrine" redirects here. For the US broadcasting policy, see 542:
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
2248:
Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc.
2152:
United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures
640:
SFC Richard Stayskal Military Medical Accountability Act of 2019
117: 2488: 2439: 1937: 1895:
JPMorgan Chase Bank v. Traffic Stream (BVI) Infrastructure Ltd.
1632: 1103: 1061: 38: 1498:
Inyo County v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community
736: 1183:
Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp.
472:
The reinstatement of Griggs by the Tenth Circuit is reversed.
469:
The dismissal of Jefferson by the Fourth Circuit is affirmed.
1855:
Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co.
1847:
Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle
1474:
Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc.
1175:
Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States
903:
177 F.2d 535 and 178 F.2d 518 affirmed; 18 F.2d 1 reversed.
2387:
County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York State
1291:
Hinderlider v. La Plata River & Cherry Creek Ditch Co.
500:
applied the doctrine to a fourth class Midshipman at the
466:
The dismissal of Feres by the District Court is affirmed.
370:
The case was heard by the United States Supreme Court in
324:
combined three cases pending in the federal courts: the
311:
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
2604:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Vinson Court
2280:
Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn
1159:
England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners
656:
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 340
1831:
Oneida Indian Nation of New York v. County of Oneida
1522:
City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York
1143:
Louisiana Power & Light Co. v. City of Thibodaux
253:
held that the United States is not liable under the
120:
535 and 178 F.2d 518, affirmed; 178 F.2d 1, reversed
2370: 2160:
Schlesinger v. Reservists Committee to Stop the War
2085: 2032: 1995: 1950: 1346: 1309: 1248: 1193: 1116: 230: 222: 211: 206: 135: 124: 112: 104: 99: 67: 57: 50: 31: 1759:Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mottley 2594:United States federal sovereign immunity case law 2589:United States Constitution Article Three case law 1775:American Well Works Co. v. Layne & Bowler Co. 1336:Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp. 2272:Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency 1328:District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman 522: 1538:Permanent Mission of India v. City of New York 915:, 42 F.3d 297 (5th Cir. 1995). 1871:Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Schor 1679:American Insurance Co. v. 356 Bales of Cotton 1073: 8: 1879:Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson 1506:United States v. White Mountain Apache Tribe 1151:United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Ideal Cement Co. 392:Does FTCA create a new cause of tort action? 932:, 2009 U.S. Dist. (E.D. Cal. Feb. 9, 2009). 2485: 2436: 1947: 1934: 1783:Smith v. Kansas City Title & Trust Co. 1629: 1570:Republic of Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd. 1113: 1100: 1080: 1066: 1058: 28: 2352:FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine 2264:Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation 600:Doctrine was “unfair” and “irrational.” 925: 923: 921: 666: 621:New York's 22nd congressional district 1530:Dolan v. United States Postal Service 1299:Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States 451:"distinctively federal in character." 26:1950 United States Supreme Court case 7: 2296:Clapper v. Amnesty International USA 1791:Hartsville Oil Mill v. United States 963:Albert, Victoria (August 13, 2019). 2509:Osborn v. Bank of the United States 2051:Toilet Goods Ass'n, Inc. v. Gardner 1418:Banco Nacional de Cuba v. Sabbatino 1214:Seneca Nation of Indians v. Christy 2184:Pfizer Inc. v. Government of India 1586:Jam v. International Finance Corp. 1127:Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. 251:Supreme Court of the United States 44:Supreme Court of the United States 14: 2609:United States Supreme Court cases 1370:The Schooner Exchange v. M'Faddon 1027:135 (1950) is available from: 339:A common issue arising under the 275:The practical effect is that the 1546:Ali v. Federal Bureau of Prisons 744:from the original on 2023-03-25. 37: 2599:United States military case law 1887:Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc. 1578:OBB Personenverkehr AG v. Sachs 642:, signed into law by President 544:unsuccessfully argued that the 367:cause of action under the Act. 2584:1950 in United States case law 2224:Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife 2176:Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois 1514:Republic of Austria v. Altmann 1426:Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez 688: (1987), which reaffirmed 615:In March 2009, Representative 437:for them and their dependents. 304:Department of Veterans Affairs 1: 2256:DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno 1985:Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer 1594:Republic of Sudan v. Harrison 1283:Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins 719:492 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir. 2007) 514:National Naval Medical Center 2200:City of Los Angeles v. Lyons 1394:Schillinger v. United States 1320:Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co. 498:5th Circuit Court of Appeals 1969:Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez 1410:United States v. Wunderlich 502:United States Naval Academy 2625: 2525:Mistretta v. United States 1751:Burton v. United States II 1727:City of St. Louis v. Myers 1602:Opati v. Republic of Sudan 1206:Murdock v. City of Memphis 51:Argued October 12–13, 1950 18: 2495: 2484: 2448: 2435: 2336:TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez 1946: 1933: 1743:Burton v. United States I 1695:United States v. Jackalow 1671:Martin v. Hunter's Lessee 1641: 1628: 1112: 1099: 994:The Fayetteville Observer 692:, the tortfeasor under a 540:, a plaintiff before the 235: 140: 129: 36: 2557:Bank Markazi v. Peterson 2328:Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski 1977:Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski 1767:Muskrat v. United States 1735:Barrett v. United States 1442:United States v. Stanley 1222:Fox Film Corp. v. Muller 1197:independent state ground 675:Johnson v. United States 625:House of Representatives 550:equal protection clauses 53:Decided December 4, 1950 2541:United States v. Hatter 2533:Peretz v. United States 2470:Cramer v. United States 2112:Massachusetts v. Mellon 1863:Thomas v. Union Carbide 1562:United States v. Bormes 1311:Rooker–Feldman doctrine 1259:United States v. Hudson 913:Miller v. United States 869:Brooks v. United States 494:Miller v. United States 487:Miller v. United States 460:Brooks v. United States 416:Brooks v. United States 413:How are the rulings in 341:Federal Tort Claims Act 255:Federal Tort Claims Act 237:Federal Tort Claims Act 2304:Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins 2022:Nixon v. United States 1719:United States v. Klein 1610:Trump v. United States 1458:Saudi Arabia v. Nelson 1402:Feres v. United States 1378:Mississippi v. Johnson 1135:Burford v. Sun Oil Co. 1017:Feres v. United States 859:, 340 U.S. at 144–145. 847:, 340 U.S. at 142–144. 823:, 340 U.S. at 141–142. 799:, 340 U.S. at 140–141. 787:, 340 U.S. at 139–140. 763:, 340 U.S. at 136–146. 548:Doctrine violated the 527: 322:Feres v. United States 306:benefits legislation. 246:Feres v. United States 32:Feres v. United States 2462:United States v. Burr 2411:Rucho v. Common Cause 2312:Texas v. Pennsylvania 2288:Bond v. United States 2144:Sierra Club v. Morton 1839:Arizona v. New Mexico 1823:Glidden Co. v. Zdanok 1799:Wisconsin v. Illinois 1703:Ex parte Vallandigham 1663:United States v. More 1353:presidential immunity 942:Witt v. United States 930:Witt v. United States 596:Doctrine because the 566:Travis Air Force Base 558:Fourteenth Amendments 538:Witt v. United States 531:Witt v. United States 1386:United States v. Lee 715:Schoenfeld v. Quamme 589:wrongful death claim 587:Witt's wife filed a 419:to be distinguished? 2128:Altvater v. Freeman 2104:Fairchild v. Hughes 2014:Goldwater v. Carter 1961:DeFunis v. Odegaard 1647:Chisholm v. Georgia 1434:Nixon v. Fitzgerald 1050:Library of Congress 582:anoxic brain injury 562:Hill Air Force Base 215:Jackson, joined by 2517:Forrester v. White 2403:Vieth v. Jubelirer 2360:Murthy v. Missouri 2216:Diamond v. Charles 2096:Bailiff v. Tipping 1997:Political question 1815:Colegrove v. Green 1655:Marbury v. Madison 1554:Samantar v. Yousuf 1348:Sovereign immunity 1250:Federal common law 1089:U.S. Supreme Court 894:, 340 U.S. at 146. 835:, 340 U.S. at 136. 811:, 340 U.S. at 141. 775:, 340 U.S. at 139. 477:Challenges to the 286:loss of consortium 270:sovereign immunity 175:William O. Douglas 151:Associate Justices 86:71 S. Ct. 153; 95 2571: 2570: 2567: 2566: 2549:Stern v. Marshall 2480: 2479: 2431: 2430: 2427: 2426: 2417:Benisek v. Lamone 2395:Davis v. Bandemer 2344:Biden v. Nebraska 2320:Trump v. New York 2075:Trump v. New York 1929: 1928: 1911:Bowles v. Russell 1807:Crowell v. Benson 1711:Ex parte McCardle 1624: 1623: 1620: 1619: 1362:Little v. Barreme 1230:Harrison v. NAACP 1167:Younger v. Harris 944:, 131 S. Ct. 3058 570:endotracheal tube 242: 241: 179:Robert H. Jackson 167:Felix Frankfurter 21:Fairness doctrine 2616: 2486: 2454:Ex parte Bollman 2437: 1948: 1935: 1919:Patchak v. Zinke 1630: 1466:Clinton v. Jones 1238:Michigan v. Long 1114: 1101: 1082: 1075: 1068: 1059: 1054: 1048: 1045: 1039: 1036: 1030: 1004: 1003: 1001: 1000: 988:Riley, Rachael. 985: 979: 978: 976: 975: 960: 954: 951: 945: 939: 933: 927: 916: 910: 904: 901: 895: 889: 883: 866: 860: 854: 848: 842: 836: 830: 824: 818: 812: 806: 800: 794: 788: 782: 776: 770: 764: 758: 752: 746: 745: 728: 722: 711: 705: 671: 611:Other challenges 518:vestibular nerve 463:, distinguished. 292:in loco parentis 187:Harold H. Burton 136:Court membership 41: 40: 29: 2624: 2623: 2619: 2618: 2617: 2615: 2614: 2613: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2563: 2501:Stuart v. Laird 2491: 2476: 2444: 2423: 2366: 2208:Allen v. Wright 2168:Warth v. Seldin 2120:Ex parte Levitt 2081: 2028: 1991: 1942: 1925: 1687:Sheldon v. Sill 1637: 1616: 1351: 1342: 1305: 1244: 1196: 1189: 1108: 1095: 1086: 1052: 1046: 1043: 1037: 1034: 1028: 1012: 1007: 998: 996: 987: 986: 982: 973: 971: 969:www.cbsnews.com 962: 961: 957: 952: 948: 940: 936: 928: 919: 911: 907: 902: 898: 890: 886: 867: 863: 855: 851: 843: 839: 831: 827: 819: 815: 807: 803: 795: 791: 783: 779: 771: 767: 759: 755: 749: 730: 729: 725: 712: 708: 672: 668: 664: 652: 617:Maurice Hinchey 613: 576:instead of his 534: 490: 483: 426: 380: 319: 189: 177: 165: 163:Stanley F. Reed 116:On remand: 177 95: 52: 46: 27: 24: 17: 12: 11: 5: 2622: 2620: 2612: 2611: 2606: 2601: 2596: 2591: 2586: 2576: 2575: 2569: 2568: 2565: 2564: 2562: 2561: 2553: 2545: 2537: 2529: 2521: 2513: 2505: 2496: 2493: 2492: 2489: 2482: 2481: 2478: 2477: 2475: 2474: 2466: 2458: 2449: 2446: 2445: 2440: 2433: 2432: 2429: 2428: 2425: 2424: 2422: 2421: 2407: 2399: 2391: 2383: 2379:Hayburn's Case 2374: 2372: 2368: 2367: 2365: 2364: 2356: 2348: 2340: 2332: 2324: 2316: 2308: 2300: 2292: 2284: 2276: 2268: 2260: 2252: 2244: 2236: 2232:Raines v. Byrd 2228: 2220: 2212: 2204: 2196: 2188: 2180: 2172: 2164: 2156: 2148: 2140: 2136:Flast v. Cohen 2132: 2124: 2116: 2108: 2100: 2091: 2089: 2083: 2082: 2080: 2079: 2071: 2063: 2059:Laird v. Tatum 2055: 2047: 2038: 2036: 2030: 2029: 2027: 2026: 2018: 2010: 2001: 1999: 1993: 1992: 1990: 1989: 1981: 1973: 1965: 1956: 1954: 1944: 1943: 1940:Justiciability 1938: 1931: 1930: 1927: 1926: 1924: 1923: 1915: 1907: 1899: 1891: 1883: 1875: 1867: 1859: 1851: 1843: 1835: 1827: 1819: 1811: 1803: 1795: 1787: 1779: 1771: 1763: 1755: 1747: 1739: 1731: 1723: 1715: 1707: 1699: 1691: 1683: 1675: 1667: 1659: 1651: 1642: 1639: 1638: 1633: 1626: 1625: 1622: 1621: 1618: 1617: 1615: 1614: 1606: 1598: 1590: 1582: 1574: 1566: 1558: 1550: 1542: 1534: 1526: 1518: 1510: 1502: 1494: 1486: 1478: 1470: 1462: 1454: 1446: 1438: 1430: 1422: 1414: 1406: 1398: 1390: 1382: 1374: 1366: 1357: 1355: 1344: 1343: 1341: 1340: 1332: 1324: 1315: 1313: 1307: 1306: 1304: 1303: 1295: 1287: 1279: 1271: 1267:Swift v. Tyson 1263: 1254: 1252: 1246: 1245: 1243: 1242: 1234: 1226: 1218: 1210: 1201: 1199: 1191: 1190: 1188: 1187: 1179: 1171: 1163: 1155: 1147: 1139: 1131: 1122: 1120: 1110: 1109: 1104: 1097: 1096: 1087: 1085: 1084: 1077: 1070: 1062: 1056: 1055: 1032:Google Scholar 1011: 1010:External links 1008: 1006: 1005: 980: 955: 946: 934: 917: 905: 896: 884: 861: 849: 837: 825: 813: 801: 789: 777: 765: 753: 747: 723: 706: 665: 663: 660: 659: 658: 651: 648: 612: 609: 533: 528: 489: 484: 482: 475: 474: 473: 470: 467: 464: 456: 452: 448: 445: 442: 438: 434: 431: 425: 422: 421: 420: 411: 408: 405: 402: 399: 396: 393: 390: 387: 384: 379: 376: 318: 315: 282:wrongful death 277:Feres doctrine 240: 239: 233: 232: 228: 227: 224: 220: 219: 213: 209: 208: 204: 203: 202: 201: 199:Sherman Minton 152: 149: 147:Fred M. Vinson 144: 138: 137: 133: 132: 127: 126: 122: 121: 114: 110: 109: 106: 102: 101: 97: 96: 85: 69: 65: 64: 59: 58:Full case name 55: 54: 48: 47: 42: 34: 33: 25: 15: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2621: 2610: 2607: 2605: 2602: 2600: 2597: 2595: 2592: 2590: 2587: 2585: 2582: 2581: 2579: 2559: 2558: 2554: 2551: 2550: 2546: 2543: 2542: 2538: 2535: 2534: 2530: 2527: 2526: 2522: 2519: 2518: 2514: 2511: 2510: 2506: 2503: 2502: 2498: 2497: 2494: 2487: 2483: 2472: 2471: 2467: 2464: 2463: 2459: 2456: 2455: 2451: 2450: 2447: 2443: 2438: 2434: 2419: 2418: 2413: 2412: 2408: 2405: 2404: 2400: 2397: 2396: 2392: 2389: 2388: 2384: 2381: 2380: 2376: 2375: 2373: 2369: 2362: 2361: 2357: 2354: 2353: 2349: 2346: 2345: 2341: 2338: 2337: 2333: 2330: 2329: 2325: 2322: 2321: 2317: 2314: 2313: 2309: 2306: 2305: 2301: 2298: 2297: 2293: 2290: 2289: 2285: 2282: 2281: 2277: 2274: 2273: 2269: 2266: 2265: 2261: 2258: 2257: 2253: 2250: 2249: 2245: 2242: 2241: 2237: 2234: 2233: 2229: 2226: 2225: 2221: 2218: 2217: 2213: 2210: 2209: 2205: 2202: 2201: 2197: 2194: 2193: 2189: 2186: 2185: 2181: 2178: 2177: 2173: 2170: 2169: 2165: 2162: 2161: 2157: 2154: 2153: 2149: 2146: 2145: 2141: 2138: 2137: 2133: 2130: 2129: 2125: 2122: 2121: 2117: 2114: 2113: 2109: 2106: 2105: 2101: 2098: 2097: 2093: 2092: 2090: 2088: 2084: 2077: 2076: 2072: 2069: 2068: 2064: 2061: 2060: 2056: 2053: 2052: 2048: 2045: 2044: 2043:Poe v. Ullman 2040: 2039: 2037: 2035: 2031: 2024: 2023: 2019: 2016: 2015: 2011: 2008: 2007: 2006:Baker v. Carr 2003: 2002: 2000: 1998: 1994: 1987: 1986: 1982: 1979: 1978: 1974: 1971: 1970: 1966: 1963: 1962: 1958: 1957: 1955: 1953: 1949: 1945: 1941: 1936: 1932: 1921: 1920: 1916: 1913: 1912: 1908: 1905: 1904: 1900: 1897: 1896: 1892: 1889: 1888: 1884: 1881: 1880: 1876: 1873: 1872: 1868: 1865: 1864: 1860: 1857: 1856: 1852: 1849: 1848: 1844: 1841: 1840: 1836: 1833: 1832: 1828: 1825: 1824: 1820: 1817: 1816: 1812: 1809: 1808: 1804: 1801: 1800: 1796: 1793: 1792: 1788: 1785: 1784: 1780: 1777: 1776: 1772: 1769: 1768: 1764: 1761: 1760: 1756: 1753: 1752: 1748: 1745: 1744: 1740: 1737: 1736: 1732: 1729: 1728: 1724: 1721: 1720: 1716: 1713: 1712: 1708: 1705: 1704: 1700: 1697: 1696: 1692: 1689: 1688: 1684: 1681: 1680: 1676: 1673: 1672: 1668: 1665: 1664: 1660: 1657: 1656: 1652: 1649: 1648: 1644: 1643: 1640: 1636: 1631: 1627: 1612: 1611: 1607: 1604: 1603: 1599: 1596: 1595: 1591: 1588: 1587: 1583: 1580: 1579: 1575: 1572: 1571: 1567: 1564: 1563: 1559: 1556: 1555: 1551: 1548: 1547: 1543: 1540: 1539: 1535: 1532: 1531: 1527: 1524: 1523: 1519: 1516: 1515: 1511: 1508: 1507: 1503: 1500: 1499: 1495: 1492: 1491: 1487: 1484: 1483: 1479: 1476: 1475: 1471: 1468: 1467: 1463: 1460: 1459: 1455: 1452: 1451: 1447: 1444: 1443: 1439: 1436: 1435: 1431: 1428: 1427: 1423: 1420: 1419: 1415: 1412: 1411: 1407: 1404: 1403: 1399: 1396: 1395: 1391: 1388: 1387: 1383: 1380: 1379: 1375: 1372: 1371: 1367: 1364: 1363: 1359: 1358: 1356: 1354: 1349: 1345: 1338: 1337: 1333: 1330: 1329: 1325: 1322: 1321: 1317: 1316: 1314: 1312: 1308: 1301: 1300: 1296: 1293: 1292: 1288: 1285: 1284: 1280: 1277: 1276: 1272: 1269: 1268: 1264: 1261: 1260: 1256: 1255: 1253: 1251: 1247: 1240: 1239: 1235: 1232: 1231: 1227: 1224: 1223: 1219: 1216: 1215: 1211: 1208: 1207: 1203: 1202: 1200: 1198: 1192: 1185: 1184: 1180: 1177: 1176: 1172: 1169: 1168: 1164: 1161: 1160: 1156: 1153: 1152: 1148: 1145: 1144: 1140: 1137: 1136: 1132: 1129: 1128: 1124: 1123: 1121: 1119: 1115: 1111: 1107: 1102: 1098: 1093: 1090: 1083: 1078: 1076: 1071: 1069: 1064: 1063: 1060: 1051: 1042: 1033: 1026: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1013: 1009: 995: 991: 984: 981: 970: 966: 959: 956: 950: 947: 943: 938: 935: 931: 926: 924: 922: 918: 914: 909: 906: 900: 897: 893: 888: 885: 881: 878: 874: 870: 865: 862: 858: 853: 850: 846: 841: 838: 834: 829: 826: 822: 817: 814: 810: 805: 802: 798: 793: 790: 786: 781: 778: 774: 769: 766: 762: 757: 754: 751: 748: 743: 739: 738: 733: 727: 724: 720: 716: 710: 707: 703: 699: 695: 691: 687: 684: 680: 676: 673:According to 670: 667: 661: 657: 654: 653: 649: 647: 645: 641: 635: 632: 628: 626: 622: 618: 610: 608: 606: 605:amicus briefs 601: 599: 595: 590: 585: 583: 579: 575: 571: 567: 563: 559: 555: 551: 547: 543: 539: 532: 529: 526: 521: 519: 515: 511: 507: 503: 499: 495: 488: 485: 480: 476: 471: 468: 465: 462: 461: 457: 453: 449: 446: 443: 439: 435: 432: 428: 427: 423: 418: 417: 412: 409: 406: 403: 400: 397: 394: 391: 388: 385: 382: 381: 377: 375: 373: 368: 365: 360: 357: 352: 349: 344: 342: 337: 335: 332:case and the 331: 327: 323: 316: 314: 312: 307: 305: 300: 296: 294: 293: 287: 283: 278: 273: 271: 267: 264: 260: 256: 252: 248: 247: 238: 234: 229: 225: 221: 218: 214: 210: 207:Case opinions 205: 200: 196: 192: 188: 184: 180: 176: 172: 168: 164: 160: 156: 153: 150: 148: 145: 143:Chief Justice 142: 141: 139: 134: 128: 123: 119: 115: 111: 107: 103: 98: 93: 89: 83: 82: 77: 74: 70: 66: 63: 60: 56: 49: 45: 35: 30: 22: 2555: 2547: 2539: 2531: 2523: 2515: 2507: 2499: 2468: 2460: 2452: 2415: 2409: 2401: 2393: 2385: 2377: 2358: 2350: 2342: 2334: 2326: 2318: 2310: 2302: 2294: 2286: 2278: 2270: 2262: 2254: 2246: 2240:FEC v. Akins 2238: 2230: 2222: 2214: 2206: 2198: 2190: 2182: 2174: 2166: 2158: 2150: 2142: 2134: 2126: 2118: 2110: 2102: 2094: 2073: 2065: 2057: 2049: 2041: 2020: 2012: 2004: 1983: 1975: 1967: 1959: 1917: 1909: 1901: 1893: 1885: 1877: 1869: 1861: 1853: 1845: 1837: 1829: 1821: 1813: 1805: 1797: 1789: 1781: 1773: 1765: 1757: 1749: 1741: 1733: 1725: 1717: 1709: 1701: 1693: 1685: 1677: 1669: 1661: 1653: 1645: 1635:Jurisdiction 1608: 1600: 1592: 1584: 1576: 1568: 1560: 1552: 1544: 1536: 1528: 1520: 1512: 1504: 1496: 1488: 1480: 1472: 1464: 1456: 1448: 1440: 1432: 1424: 1416: 1408: 1401: 1400: 1392: 1384: 1376: 1368: 1360: 1334: 1326: 1318: 1297: 1289: 1281: 1273: 1265: 1257: 1236: 1228: 1220: 1212: 1204: 1195:Adequate and 1181: 1173: 1165: 1157: 1149: 1141: 1133: 1125: 1016: 997:. Retrieved 993: 983: 972:. Retrieved 968: 958: 949: 941: 937: 929: 912: 908: 899: 891: 887: 882: (1949). 868: 864: 856: 852: 844: 840: 832: 828: 820: 816: 808: 804: 796: 792: 784: 780: 772: 768: 760: 756: 750: 735: 726: 714: 709: 701: 697: 693: 689: 674: 669: 644:Donald Trump 636: 633: 629: 614: 602: 597: 593: 586: 545: 537: 535: 530: 523: 493: 491: 486: 478: 458: 414: 369: 363: 361: 355: 353: 347: 345: 338: 333: 329: 325: 321: 320: 308: 301: 297: 290: 276: 274: 245: 244: 243: 231:Laws applied 216: 194: 191:Tom C. Clark 182: 170: 158: 100:Case history 79: 61: 1092:Article III 686:681, 686-92 268:concept of 223:Concurrence 2578:Categories 1118:Abstention 1106:Federalism 999:2020-03-18 974:2020-03-18 662:References 564:, Utah to 372:certiorari 328:case, the 266:common-law 155:Hugo Black 113:Subsequent 92:U.S. LEXIS 90:152; 1950 574:esophagus 572:into his 510:U.S. Navy 356:Jefferson 330:Jefferson 217:unanimous 68:Citations 2087:Standing 2034:Ripeness 1952:Mootness 1094:case law 1015:Text of 742:Archived 650:See also 481:Doctrine 259:furlough 212:Majority 131:service. 2442:Treason 698:Johnson 578:trachea 552:of the 430:forces. 263:English 226:Douglas 125:Holding 2560:(2016) 2552:(2011) 2544:(2001) 2536:(1991) 2528:(1989) 2520:(1988) 2512:(1824) 2504:(1803) 2490:Others 2473:(1945) 2465:(1807) 2457:(1807) 2420:(2019) 2406:(2004) 2398:(1986) 2390:(1985) 2382:(1792) 2371:Others 2363:(2024) 2355:(2024) 2347:(2023) 2339:(2021) 2331:(2021) 2323:(2020) 2315:(2020) 2307:(2016) 2299:(2013) 2291:(2011) 2283:(2011) 2275:(2007) 2267:(2007) 2259:(2006) 2251:(2000) 2243:(1998) 2235:(1997) 2227:(1992) 2219:(1986) 2211:(1984) 2203:(1983) 2195:(1982) 2187:(1978) 2179:(1977) 2171:(1975) 2163:(1974) 2155:(1973) 2147:(1972) 2139:(1968) 2131:(1943) 2123:(1937) 2115:(1923) 2107:(1922) 2099:(1805) 2078:(2020) 2070:(1985) 2062:(1972) 2054:(1967) 2046:(1961) 2025:(1993) 2017:(1979) 2009:(1962) 1988:(2023) 1980:(2021) 1972:(2016) 1964:(1974) 1922:(2018) 1914:(2007) 1906:(2005) 1898:(2002) 1890:(1995) 1882:(1986) 1874:(1986) 1866:(1985) 1858:(1982) 1850:(1977) 1842:(1976) 1834:(1974) 1826:(1962) 1818:(1946) 1810:(1932) 1802:(1929) 1794:(1926) 1786:(1921) 1778:(1916) 1770:(1911) 1762:(1908) 1754:(1906) 1746:(1905) 1738:(1898) 1730:(1885) 1722:(1871) 1714:(1869) 1706:(1864) 1698:(1862) 1690:(1850) 1682:(1828) 1674:(1816) 1666:(1805) 1658:(1803) 1650:(1793) 1613:(2024) 1605:(2020) 1597:(2019) 1589:(2019) 1581:(2015) 1573:(2014) 1565:(2012) 1557:(2010) 1549:(2008) 1541:(2007) 1533:(2006) 1525:(2005) 1517:(2004) 1509:(2003) 1501:(2003) 1493:(2001) 1485:(1999) 1477:(1998) 1469:(1997) 1461:(1993) 1453:(1991) 1445:(1987) 1437:(1982) 1429:(1978) 1421:(1964) 1413:(1951) 1405:(1950) 1397:(1894) 1389:(1882) 1381:(1867) 1373:(1812) 1365:(1804) 1339:(2005) 1331:(1983) 1323:(1923) 1302:(1943) 1294:(1938) 1286:(1938) 1278:(1928) 1270:(1842) 1262:(1812) 1241:(1983) 1233:(1959) 1225:(1935) 1217:(1896) 1209:(1875) 1186:(1983) 1178:(1976) 1170:(1971) 1162:(1964) 1154:(1962) 1146:(1959) 1138:(1943) 1130:(1941) 1053:  1047:  1044:  1041:Justia 1038:  1035:  1029:  871:, 496:, the 455:cases. 378:Issues 364:Griggs 336:case. 334:Griggs 197: 195:· 193:  185: 183:· 181:  173: 171:· 169:  161: 159:· 157:  88:L. Ed. 1023: 892:Feres 875: 857:Feres 845:Feres 833:Feres 821:Feres 809:Feres 797:Feres 785:Feres 773:Feres 761:Feres 702:Feres 694:Feres 690:Feres 681: 598:Feres 594:Feres 554:Fifth 546:Feres 479:Feres 348:Feres 326:Feres 317:Facts 105:Prior 1025:U.S. 877:U.S. 683:U.S. 556:and 506:boom 441:law. 424:Held 362:The 354:The 346:The 118:F.2d 94:1352 81:more 73:U.S. 71:340 1350:and 1021:340 873:337 737:NPR 713:In 679:481 619:of 536:In 492:In 284:or 76:135 2580:: 2414:/ 1019:, 992:. 967:. 920:^ 880:49 740:. 734:. 717:, 677:, 374:. 272:. 1081:e 1074:t 1067:v 1002:. 977:. 704:. 84:) 78:( 23:.

Index

Fairness doctrine
Supreme Court of the United States
U.S.
135
more
L. Ed.
U.S. LEXIS
F.2d
Fred M. Vinson
Hugo Black
Stanley F. Reed
Felix Frankfurter
William O. Douglas
Robert H. Jackson
Harold H. Burton
Tom C. Clark
Sherman Minton
Federal Tort Claims Act
Supreme Court of the United States
Federal Tort Claims Act
furlough
English
common-law
sovereign immunity
wrongful death
loss of consortium
in loco parentis
Department of Veterans Affairs
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020
Federal Tort Claims Act

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑