Legal Opinion

Michael J. Sutton and John Wiley Mitchell v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided June 25, 1987No. 85-2235PublishedCited by 115 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHN R. BROWN, Circuit Judge:

Today, we consider the interplay between two sections of the Federal Tort Claims Act: the “discretionary function exception” of 28 U.S.C. § 2680(a), and the “law enforcement proviso” of § 2680(h). The court below incorrectly interpreted the relationship between the two when it dismissed the plaintiffs’ somewhat tenuous claims of malicious prosecution because they had failed to surmount the hurdle of the discretionary function exception. Because the trial court lacked the precise facts on which to base its decision, we reverse and remand.

An Evil Deed, a Forged Deed

I…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  3. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Carlson v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

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

3Cited by115 opinions

  1. James G. Jackson v. City of Columbus, Gregory Lashutka, Thomas W. Rice, Sr.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
  2. Gasho v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
  3. Carnegie-Mellon University v. CohillSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  4. Rafael Medina v. United States of America, No. 00-2156Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2001
  5. Nguyen v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2009

110 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