Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Barry Dean Rogers, by His Guardian Ad Litem, Luther James Rogers v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided May 20, 1968No. 11699Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partWinter, Circuit Judge

I agree that the judgment should be reversed and the case remanded for plenary hearing to determine if the Marshal assumed a duty toward the plaintiff, the breach of which gave rise to liability on the part of the United States. I disagree, however, that, on the facts of this case not in dispute, there could be any duty to the plaintiff arising out of 18 U.S.C.A. § 4283, or the order entered thereunder, which was breached. On this point I am content to rest on the conclusions of the able district judge, as expressed in his opinion.* Accordingly, I would limit the scope of the remand to an…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Rogers v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1967

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API