Legal Opinion
Binning v. Hardin
District Court, S.D. Indiana
Decided January 4, 1990No. TH 88-41-CPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AS THE SOLE DEFENDANT
McKINNEY, District Judge.
The defendants in this prisoner tort action filed a motion to substitute the United States of America as the sole defendant in this cause, in place of various prison employees originally named as defendants. This motion was made following the November 18,1988, amendment to the Federal Tort Claims Act, (“FTCA”) intended by Congress to apply retroactively. The plaintiff, Michael G. Binning, opposes substitution on the ground that retroactive application of the amendment will…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Usery v. Turner Elkhorn Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Ferguson v. SkrupaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. RA Gray & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Westfall v. ErwinSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Margarito Salmon, Magdalena Salmon, Individually and as Next Friend for Margarito Salmon, Jr. v. Martin R. Schwarz and Arturo A. GonzalezCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991