Federal Tort Claims Act — Injury Lawsuits Against the Federal Government under Personal Injury
1. Overview of the FTCA
The Federal Tort Claims Act, enacted in 1946 and codified at 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671–2680, waives the federal government’s sovereign immunity for certain torts committed by federal employees in the scope of their employment.
This law allows individuals to recover damages for personal injury, property loss, or wrongful death caused by the negligence or wrongful act or omission of any federal employee, under circumstances where a private person would be liable under the law of the state where the act occurred.
2. Key Elements of a Personal Injury Claim under the FTCA
To bring a successful personal injury claim under the FTCA, a plaintiff must prove:
The injury was caused by a federal employee
The employee was acting within the scope of their employment
The act or omission was negligent or wrongful
The negligence caused injury to the plaintiff
A private person in similar circumstances would be liable under the applicable state law
3. Procedural Requirements
Before suing under the FTCA, a claimant must:
File an administrative claim with the appropriate federal agency (Standard Form 95)
The agency has 6 months to respond. If the claim is denied or not resolved within 6 months, the claimant may then file a lawsuit in federal court
The lawsuit must be brought within 6 months of the agency's final denial
Note: There is no right to a jury trial in FTCA cases. The case is heard by a federal judge.
4. Limitations and Exceptions
The FTCA has several important exceptions, including:
Intentional torts (e.g., assault, battery) — unless committed by law enforcement officers
Discretionary function exception – bars claims based on acts involving judgment or choice by federal employees
Combatant activities during times of war
Independent contractors – unless they are deemed employees for FTCA purposes
Claims arising in foreign countries
5. Damages under the FTCA
Compensatory damages are available, such as:
Medical expenses
Lost wages
Pain and suffering
Punitive damages are not allowed
6. Important Case Law
Dalehite v. United States, 346 U.S. 15 (1953)
Facts: Plaintiffs sued after a massive explosion of fertilizer killed hundreds in Texas. The fertilizer was part of a government program.
Holding: The Supreme Court held that the government was immune under the discretionary function exception. The government could not be sued for policy decisions made at a planning level, even if they resulted in disaster.
Importance: This case helped define the scope of the discretionary function exception.
Indian Towing Co. v. United States, 350 U.S. 61 (1955)
Facts: A tugboat ran aground because a lighthouse operated by the Coast Guard failed to function properly. The company sued the government.
Holding: The Supreme Court held that once the government undertakes a service (like running a lighthouse), it must do so with due care. The government could be held liable for negligent performance of operational duties.
Importance: This case clarified that the FTCA allows suits for negligent performance, even if the original decision to provide the service was discretionary.
Sheridan v. United States, 487 U.S. 392 (1988)
Facts: A government-employed hospital worker (a Navy corpsman) shot a person after drinking on duty. Other employees knew he had a gun but failed to act.
Holding: Although assault is an intentional tort and usually excluded, the Court held the government was still liable due to negligent acts by employees in failing to prevent the incident, which occurred within the scope of their employment.
Importance: Expanded liability by allowing negligence claims even when the immediate cause was an intentional tort.
United States v. Muniz, 374 U.S. 150 (1963)
Facts: Federal prisoners sued the government for injuries caused by prison guards' negligence.
Holding: The Supreme Court allowed the suit, stating prisoners can sue under the FTCA for personal injuries caused by the negligence of prison employees.
Importance: Affirmed that prisoners are not barred from suing the federal government under the FTCA.
7. FTCA vs. Bivens Claims
While the FTCA deals with negligence and tort liability, Bivens claims allow individuals to sue federal officers personally for constitutional violations (e.g., unlawful search or seizure). These are separate causes of action and cannot be brought against the United States itself.
8. Real-World Applications
Medical malpractice at VA hospitals or military clinics
Car accidents caused by postal trucks or federal agents
Slip-and-fall injuries at federal buildings
Negligence by TSA agents at airports
Injuries during arrest by federal law enforcement (if due to negligence or allowed intentional torts)
9. Conclusion
The Federal Tort Claims Act provides a vital mechanism for holding the federal government accountable when its employees cause personal injury through negligence. However, it includes several complex exceptions, procedural requirements, and limitations that make it distinct from ordinary personal injury lawsuits against private entities.
Anyone considering a personal injury claim under the FTCA should be aware of the strict administrative filing process, the discretionary function defense, and the non-availability of punitive damages.
RELATED Blog
0 comments