Katia Gutierrez De Martinez, Eduardo Martinez Puccini and Henny Martinez De Papaiani v. Dirk A. Lamagno et al. (515 U.S. 417)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 14, 1995 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 515 U.S. 417 · 115 S. Ct. 2227
- Decided
- June 14, 1995
- Term
- October Term 1994
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority author
- Justice Ginsburg
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court, except as to Part IV. When a federal employee is sued for a wrongful or negli-. gent act, the Federal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 1988 (commonly known as the Westfall Act) empowers the Attorney General to certify that the employee “was acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incident out of which the claim arose . . . 28 U. S. C. §2679(d)(1). Upon certification, the employee is dismissed from the action and the United States is substituted as defendant. The case then falls under the governance of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), ch. 753, 60 Stat. 812,842. Generally, such cases unfold much as cases do against other employers who concede respondeat superior liability. If, however, an exception to the FTCA shields the United States from suit, the plaintiff may be left without a tort action against any party. This case is illustrative. The Attorney General certified that an allegedly negligent employee “was acting within the scope of his . . . employment” at the time of the episode in suit. Once brought into the case as a defendant, however, the United States asserted immunity, because the incident giving rise to the claim occurred abroad and the FTCA excepts “[a]ny claim arising in a foreign country.” 28 U. S. C. §2680(k). Endeavoring to redeem their lawsuit,…
Excerpt of a 37,157-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.