24 Cited authorities

United States v. Gaubert
499 U.S. 315 (1991) Cited 2,389 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the discretionary function exception only protects actions “grounded in the policy of the regulatory regime”
Savage v. Glendale Union High School
343 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 1,430 times
Finding that Arizona school district with a substantial degree of autonomy did not perform a central government function, even though Arizona's Constitution mandated that its legislature “provide for the establishment and maintenance of a ... public school system” (quoting Ariz. Const. art. XI, § I.A)
McCarthy v. U.S.
850 F.2d 558 (9th Cir. 1988) Cited 1,160 times
Holding that a court "may review any evidence, such as affidavits and testimony, to resolve factual disputes concerning the existence of jurisdiction"
Tosco Corp. v. Communities for a Better Environment
236 F.3d 495 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 684 times
Holding the plaintiff has the burden of proving jurisdiction in order to survive a motion for lack of jurisdiction
St. Clair v. City of Chico
880 F.2d 199 (9th Cir. 1989) Cited 833 times
Holding that in a factual attack on subject matter jurisdiction, the Court may accept and evaluate evidence to determine whether jurisdiction exists
Morongo Band of Ind. v. Cal. St. Bd., Equal
849 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1988) Cited 644 times
Holding that a court without jurisdiction is without power to do anything except to dismiss the case and that any other order issued by the court would be a nullity
Doe v. See
557 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 334 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to overcome the presumption of juridical separateness
Nurse v. U.S.
226 F.3d 996 (9th Cir. 2000) Cited 364 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that although the FTCA's discretionary function exception would generally protect the creation of policies and rules, government actors do not have discretion to create unconstitutional policies
Vickers v. U.S.
228 F.3d 944 (9th Cir. 2000) Cited 194 times
Holding the discretionary function exception did not apply to shield INS investigators' failure to report and investigate because such inaction constituted a failure to follow the mandatory requirements requiring reporting and investigation
Kennewick Irr. Dist. v. U.S.
880 F.2d 1018 (9th Cir. 1989) Cited 232 times
Holding that a "general statutory duty to promote safety" is insufficient to show that the government lacked discretion
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 348,708 times 930 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 1346 - United States as defendant
28 U.S.C. § 1346 Cited 24,150 times 23 Legal Analyses
Determining liability to the claimant "in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred"
Section 2680 - Exceptions
28 U.S.C. § 2680 Cited 7,710 times 12 Legal Analyses
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
Rule 39 - Trial by Jury or by the Court
Fed. R. Civ. P. 39 Cited 1,818 times 10 Legal Analyses
Granting the trial court the power to determine that "a right of trial by jury of some or all of those issues does not exist under the Constitution or statutes of the United States"
Section 2402 - Jury trial in actions against United States
28 U.S.C. § 2402 Cited 516 times 3 Legal Analyses
Mandating bench trial

Patricia Anderson v. Federal Aviation Administration, et al

24 Cited authorities

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

Holding that a court "may review any evidence, such as affidavits and testimony, to resolve factual disputes concerning the existence of jurisdiction"

Holding the plaintiff has the burden of proving jurisdiction in order to survive a motion for lack of jurisdiction

Holding that in a factual attack on subject matter jurisdiction, the Court may accept and evaluate evidence to determine whether jurisdiction exists

Holding that a court without jurisdiction is without power to do anything except to dismiss the case and that any other order issued by the court would be a nullity

Holding that the plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to overcome the presumption of juridical separateness

Holding that although the FTCA's discretionary function exception would generally protect the creation of policies and rules, government actors do not have discretion to create unconstitutional policies

Holding the discretionary function exception did not apply to shield INS investigators' failure to report and investigate because such inaction constituted a failure to follow the mandatory requirements requiring reporting and investigation

Holding that a "general statutory duty to promote safety" is insufficient to show that the government lacked discretion

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

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

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

Granting the trial court the power to determine that "a right of trial by jury of some or all of those issues does not exist under the Constitution or statutes of the United States"

Mandating bench trial