Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rawls R. Hawes v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided May 26, 2005No. 04-1736Published

1DissentDiana Gribbon Motz, Circuit Judge

Because the majority applies the discretionary function exception in a way that drains the Federal Tort Claims Act of all meaning, I must respectfully dissent.

I

The Federal Tort Claims Act specifically authorizes suits against the United States for “personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment,” when the United States, “if a private person, would be liable.” 28 U.S.C.A. § 1346(b)(1) (West 1993 & Supp. 2004). Thus, by enacting this legislation, Congress determined that…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. United States v. GaubertSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Berkovitz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. United States v. S.A. Empresa De Viacao Aerea Rio GrandenseSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  4. Sheila Gotha v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
  5. John R. Cope v. Roland G. Scott United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1995

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API