Legal Opinion
Love v. United States
District Court, D. Montana
Decided February 2, 1994No. CV-84-167-GFPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT, and CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
HATFIELD, Chief Judge.
The plaintiffs, Clinton W. Love, Sr. and Rose Mary Love, instituted the present action against the United States of America, acting through the Farmers Home Administration (“FmHA”), seeking to recover monetary damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671-2680. 1 The matter came on for trial before the court, the Honorable Paul G. Hatfield presiding, sitting without a jury, on the 8th day of March, 1993. Mr. Robert M. Kampfer and Mr. Paul J. Petit appeared as counsel on behalf of the Loves. Ms.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Carlson v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Love v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Linda E. Lutz, as Parent and Next Friend of Catherine Lutz, a Minor v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Douglas Klett v. Robert Pim John Humphrey J. Dennis Roach United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1992
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5683, 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9718 Clinton W. Love, Sr. And Rose Mary Love, Husband and Wife v. United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995