Legal Opinion
Limo v. United States
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided May 27, 1994No. Civ. A. 92-1831PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JOHN H. PRATT, District Judge.
Before the Court is defendant Paul Pevsner’s motion for summary judgment which asserts that Dr. Pevsner is entitled to immunity from liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act because at all times relevant to this action he was an employee of the federal government. After consideration of the entire record the Court denies defendant Pevsner’s motion.
I. Background
On April 15, 1988, plaintiff underwent an operation to embolize a spinal arteriovenous malformation (“AVM”) performed by Dr. Pevsner at Walter Reed Army Medical Center (‘Walter Reed”).…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. OrleansSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Logue v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Raymond Lurch v. United States of America, Defendant-Third Party v. The Regents of the University of New Mexico and Ralph Kaplan, Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1983
- Hanson J. Broussard, Rhonda J. Broussard v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
- Dean W. Lilly v. Paul R. Fieldstone, M.D., and United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1989
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cruz v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1998
- Connell v. CopelandDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Connell v. CopelandDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010