Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio

Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

United States v. Gaubert

Holding that the discretionary function exception only protects actions “grounded in the policy of the regulatory regime”

Berkovitz v. United States

Holding that there is no choice to be protected by the discretionary function exception when a "federal statute, regulation, or policy specifically prescribes a course of action for an employee to follow"

United States v. Varig Airlines

Holding that the FAA's alleged negligence in failing to check certain specific items in the course of certificating a specific aircraft as part of a spot-check program involved “calculated risks” but fell “squarely within the discretionary function exception”

Hughes v. Pair

Holding that discomfort, worry, anxiety, upset stomach, concern, and agitation did not establish severe emotional distress

Dalehite v. United States

Holding that where discretionary function exception of § 2680 applied, district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over cause of action

Rowland v. Christian

Holding that Section 1714 superceded prior common-law negligence rules

Rayonier, Inc., v. United States

Holding that government potentially liable for Forest Service's negligent fire-fighting

Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Rule 702 - Testimony by Expert Witnesses

Adopting the Daubert standard

Section 1346 - United States as defendant

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

Rule 403 - Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons

Adopting a similar standard, but requiring the probative value to be "substantially outweighed" by these risks

Rule 801 - Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay

Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party

Rule 401 - Test for Relevant Evidence

Providing that evidence is relevant if " it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and (b) the fact is of consequence in determining the action"

Section 2671 - Definitions

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

Section 2680 - Exceptions

Concluding that claims for injurious falsehoods, disparagement of property, slander of goods, or trade libel are claims arising out of libel or slander under the FTCA

Section 2675 - Disposition by federal agency as prerequisite; evidence

Setting forth FTCA's administrative exhaustion requirement

Section 2679 - Exclusiveness of remedy

Granting tort immunity to federal agency employees

Section 212.1 - Definitions

Defining a trail as a "route 50 inches or less in width or a route over 50 inches wide that is identified and managed as a trail."

Section 200.4 - Administrative issuances

Section 200.2 - Field organization

Section 660.103 - Definitions