Legal Opinion
Nicholas Nasuti v. James Scannell
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Decided June 4, 1986No. 85-1820PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LEVIN H. CAMPBELL, Chief Judge.
The question before us is whether this court is empowered to review a district court’s order remanding part of a case that had been removed from a state court pursuant to the Federal Drivers Act. We conclude that, under the present circumstances, we are not so empowered. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
I
The Federal Drivers Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2679(b)-(e) (1982), has the effect of immunizing federal employees from claims against them personally arising out of motor vehicle accidents occurring within the scope of their…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Thermtron Products, Inc. v. HermansdorferSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Gravitt v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Employers Reinsurance Corp. v. BryantSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- United States v. RiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Railroad Co. v. WiswallSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Sheila Arbour, Personal Representative of the Estate of Victor Arbour v. Eugene JenkinsCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Nicholas Nasuti v. James Scannell, Nicholas Nasuti v. James Scannell, United States of America, in Re United States of America and James ScannellCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
- Doughty v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, LondonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
- Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. V & M Management, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
- United States of America, Defendant/third-Party v. State of Hawaii, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.