Chagnon v. Griffiths

17 F.R.D. 222, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4376
CourtDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts
DecidedMarch 9, 1955
DocketCiv. A. No. 54-186
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 17 F.R.D. 222 (Chagnon v. Griffiths) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Chagnon v. Griffiths, 17 F.R.D. 222, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4376 (D. Mass. 1955).

Opinion

ALDRICH, District Judge.

This motion raises a question under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671 et seq. The plaintiff, injured by an automobile driven by a now alleged member of the United States Selective Service while in the course of his duties on government business, sued the driver individually in the state court. The defendant removed it here under 50 U.S.C. § 738. The plaintiff moves to add the United States as a party defendant, and to add a corresponding second count to her complaint.

I do not question the general right of the plaintiff to add the government as a party, ’as distinguished from instituting a separate suit. Cf. United States v. Yellow Cab Co., 340 U.S. 543, 71 S.Ct. 399, 95 L.Ed. 523; United States v. Vernon Cab Co., D.C.Mass., 125 F.Supp. 335. I am more concerned with the question of the right of the plaintiff to sue the driver and the United States in one action, now that the government may be the only party ultimately liable.1 Cf. United States v. Gilman, 347 U.S. 507, 74 S.Ct. 695, 98 L.Ed. 898.

While ordinary claims against a principal and an agent could be joined in one action I am unwilling, where, as here, I have discretion, to have this case proceed against the United States and the driver jointly. If the plaintiff files a motion to dismiss against the driver within 10 days, I will allow the motion to add the United States as a party, subject to service of process, etc., and then dismiss against the driver. Otherwise the motion to add the United States will be denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Shapiro v. State of Maryland
336 F. Supp. 1205 (D. Maryland, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
17 F.R.D. 222, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4376, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chagnon-v-griffiths-mad-1955.