Legal Opinion

Aguiar v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided April 21, 1987No. Nos. 1077, 1078, 1079, Dockets 85-6091, 85-6093 and 85-6095PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

VAN GRAAFEILAND, Circuit Judge:

Our discussion of the background and procedural history of this litigation appears in Judge Winter’s lead opinion, 818 F.2d 145.

In addition to the numerous individual claims spawned by Agent Orange, two large class actions were brought. The first, against the chemical companies, was settled. The second, against the United States, was dismissed, and the dismissal is being challenged on this appeal.

At the outset of this litigation, ingenious counsel, concerned that they might not be able to state a claim for relief under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §…

2Cases cited51 opinions

Dalehite v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
Feres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1950
United States v. S.A. Empresa De Viacao Aerea Rio GrandenseSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
Chappell v. WallaceSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
Orloff v. WilloughbySupreme Court of the United States · 1953

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

3Cited by1 opinion

In Re "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation. Philip J. Aguiar, Each of Said Individually and as Representative of All Those Similarly Situated v. United States of America, and Other Departments and Agencies of the United States Government, as Their Several Interests May Appear, and Successors to the Above Officials, as Necessary, Dan Ford, and His Wife, Christina Ford Individually, and as Members and Representative of a Class v. United States of America, Daniel C. Batts v. United States of America, Loughery v. United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987