Friedland v. United States

209 F. Supp. 684
CourtDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts
DecidedOctober 30, 1962
DocketCiv. A. 61-568-C
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 209 F. Supp. 684 (Friedland v. United States) 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
Friedland v. United States, 209 F. Supp. 684 (D. Mass. 1962).

Opinion

CAFFREY, District Judge.

This is an action under the Federal Tort Claims Act in which the plaintiff as Administrator of the Estate of Raymond Odias Poirier seeks to recover money damages from the United States because of alleged negligence of members of the medical staff at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Brockton, Massachusetts. The negligence is said to consist of a failure to properly supervise the intestate, allegedly a schizophrenic, with the result that the intestate died from a self-inflicted wound while at large and not under adequate supervision.

The Government has filed a motion to dismiss upon the grounds (1) that the complaint fails to state a claim against the defendant upon which relief may be granted; and (2) because it appears upon the face of the complaint that the Court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter. Both grounds of the Government’s motion are related to and primarily rest upon the so-called “discretionary function” exemption contained in the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2680, and a recent decision of the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in White v. United States, 205 F.Supp. 662.

While there is some division of authority as to whether or not the Government is exempted from liability by 28 U.S.C. § 2680(a) in cases of the instant type, I believe that the better view is that expressed by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Fair v. United States, 234 F.2d 288 (1956).

The motion to dismiss is denied.

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

Related

Blessing v. United States
447 F. Supp. 1160 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1978)
Estate of Burks v. Ross
438 F.2d 230 (Sixth Circuit, 1971)
Estate v. Ross
438 F.2d 230 (Sixth Circuit, 1971)
Ernest J. Hendry v. United States
418 F.2d 774 (Second Circuit, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
209 F. Supp. 684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friedland-v-united-states-mad-1962.