Legal Opinion
Taggert v. United States
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 18, 1967No. Civ. A. 8798PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
FOLLMER, District Judge.
The plaintiffs instituted this action against Edward Peterson Kruse, Jr., to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained in an automobile accident. Subsequently, the United States of America was substituted as defendant because the said Edward Peterson Kruse, Jr., was an employee of the United States and was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the said accident and under 28 U.S.C. § 2679(b) the exclusive remedy is against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b). Then the United States filed…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. James S. Myers, Individually and for His Wife, Harriet Myers, and as Natural Guardian and Next Friend of James Myers, a MinorCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
- Adams v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Illinois · 1965
- Government Employees Insurance v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1965
- Percivill v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. Texas · 1966
3Cited by8 opinions
- Robert Colton v. John B. Swain, and Third-Party v. Pacific Indemnity Co., a Corporation, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- Abrams v. SinonMichigan Court of Appeals · 1972
- Baker v. MoorsDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 1971
- Colton v. SwainDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1973
- Courtright v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1967
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.