15 Cited authorities

Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept
901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988) Cited 15,986 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a cognizable gender discrimination claim could be brought by a female domestic violence victim where the victim alleged police denied protection and made misogynistic comments including that "he did not blame [the victim's] husband for hitting her, because of the way she was 'carrying on'"
United States v. Orleans
425 U.S. 807 (1976) Cited 1,242 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a community action agency did not act as a federal agent or instrumentality for purposes of the FTCA even though the agency was organized under federal regulations and was heavily funded by the federal government
Richards v. United States
369 U.S. 1 (1962) Cited 1,451 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that in FTCA cases "the issue of the applicable law is controlled by a formal expression of the will of Congress"
Hicks v. Small
69 F.3d 967 (9th Cir. 1995) Cited 133 times
Holding that district courts lack jurisdiction to hear challenges to benefits determinations, even if those challenges are framed as tort law claims
Blackburn v. U.S.
100 F.3d 1426 (9th Cir. 1996) Cited 120 times
Holding that Park Service's actions were protected by the discretionary function exception where policy manuals outlined general policy goals regarding safety and mandated warning the public of hazards, but did not specify how to meet those goals or how or when to warn the public
Louie v. United States
776 F.2d 819 (9th Cir. 1985) Cited 72 times
Adopting state law setting liability of state and municipal entities for government actors in FTCA cases
Adams v. U.S.
420 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2005) Cited 20 times
In Adams v. United States, 420 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2005), the Ninth Circuit held the terms “person” and “employee of the government” used in 28 U.S.C. § 2671 do not include institutions such as corporations.
Bither v. Country Mut. Ins. Co.
226 Ariz. 198 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010) Cited 13 times
Describing legislative history; citing authorities
Meier v. U.S.
310 F. App'x 976 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 8 times
No. 07-15926. Argued and Submitted December 11, 2008. Filed February 3, 2009. Joseph A. Hearst, Esquire, Berkeley, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant. Terry L. Meier, Oakland, CA, pro se. Ila C. Deiss, Assistant U.S., Katherine Burke Dowling, Assistant U.S., Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, William H. Alsup, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-05-04404-WHA. Before: B. FLETCHER
Ponders v. United States
Case Number: 13-22876-CIV-MORENO (S.D. Fla. Jun. 11, 2014) Cited 1 times
Case Number: 13-22876-CIV-MORENO 06-11-2014 CAROL PONDERS, as personal representative of the Estate of JOSE MANUEL SEGUNDO, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. FEDERICO A. MORENO ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (D.E. 16), filed on May 15, 2014. THE COURT has considered the motion and the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ADJUDGED that the motion
Section 1346 - United States as defendant
28 U.S.C. § 1346 Cited 24,035 times 23 Legal Analyses
Determining liability to the claimant "in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred"
Section 2671 - Definitions
28 U.S.C. § 2671 Cited 9,368 times 6 Legal Analyses
Defining "[e]mployee of the government" for purposes of the FTCA as "officers or employees of any federal agency "
Section 2674 - Liability of United States
28 U.S.C. § 2674 Cited 4,425 times 2 Legal Analyses
Specifying scope of United States' liability

Ellsworth v. United States of America

15 Cited authorities

Holding that a community action agency did not act as a federal agent or instrumentality for purposes of the FTCA even though the agency was organized under federal regulations and was heavily funded by the federal government

Holding that in FTCA cases "the issue of the applicable law is controlled by a formal expression of the will of Congress"

Holding that district courts lack jurisdiction to hear challenges to benefits determinations, even if those challenges are framed as tort law claims

Holding that Park Service's actions were protected by the discretionary function exception where policy manuals outlined general policy goals regarding safety and mandated warning the public of hazards, but did not specify how to meet those goals or how or when to warn the public

Adopting state law setting liability of state and municipal entities for government actors in FTCA cases

In Adams v. United States, 420 F.3d 1049 (9th Cir. 2005), the Ninth Circuit held the terms “person” and “employee of the government” used in 28 U.S.C. § 2671 do not include institutions such as corporations.

Describing legislative history; citing authorities

Determining liability to the claimant "in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred"

Defining "[e]mployee of the government" for purposes of the FTCA as "officers or employees of any federal agency "

Specifying scope of United States' liability