Louis Butler O'Neal v. March Fong Eu Roy E. Bailey, Department of Veterans Administration Dorcas T. Hardy, Commissioner of Social Security

866 F.2d 314, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 724, 1989 WL 5880

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: January 31, 1989
• Docket: 87-2541
• Status: Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Louis Butler O’Neal, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court’s order dismissing his constitutional tort action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). O’Neal contends that Roy Bailey, a Veterans Administration official, negligently failed to obtain records which would have established that O’Neal had a right to Veteran’s death pension benefits. O’Neal also contends that he is entitled to the benefits.

A plaintiff must plead more than a merely negligent act by a federal official in order to state a colorable claim under Bivens. See Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 330-31, 106 S.Ct. 662, 664-65, 88 L.Ed.2d 662 (1986) (plaintiff must plead more than mere negligence in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action); Tallman v. Reagan, 846 F.2d 494, 495 (8th Cir.1988) (extending Daniels to a Bivens -type action involving gross negligence), Nichols v. Block, 656 F.Supp. 1436, 1442 (D.Mont.1987) (“Daniels is applicable by analogy to a Bivens action against federal officials”); Artis v. Petrovsky, 638 F.Supp. 51, 54 (W.D.Mo.1986) (applying Daniels in a Bivens-type action); see also Schweiker v. Chilicky, — U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 2460, 2480, 101 L.Ed.2d 370 (1988) (Brennan, J. dissenting) (“in order to prevail in any Bivens action, [a plaintiff] must ... prove a deliberate abuse of governmental power rather than mere negligence”). Because O’Neal only alleges negligence, and the pleaded facts indicate that Bailey could not have been more than negligent, the district court properly dismissed O’Neal’s complaint.

The judgment is AFFIRMED.