Michael v. Sylvester

102 F.R.D. 229, 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15911
CourtDistrict Court, D. Connecticut
DecidedJune 13, 1984
DocketCiv. No. B 84-45(WWE)
StatusPublished

This text of 102 F.R.D. 229 (Michael v. Sylvester) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Michael v. Sylvester, 102 F.R.D. 229, 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15911 (D. Conn. 1984).

Opinion

RULING ON “MOTION AND MEMORANDUM RE AMENDMENT OF COMPLAINT”

EGINTON, District Judge.

The plaintiff in this case has moved to amend his complaint to allege a cause of action on behalf of the United States Veterans Administration. Plaintiff wishes to seek additional damages “for the sole use and benefit of the United States of America,” based upon the value of medical care the Veterans Administration provided to the plaintiff. The motion represents that the Veterans Administration has authorized plaintiffs attorney to assert its claim. Defendant has objected to the proposed amended complaint.

Even in light of the authorization by the Veterans Administration, the motion to amend the complaint must be denied. Plaintiff is correct that pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2651 the United States has a right to recover from a third party tortfeasor any expenses paid by the United States for medical care of an injured plaintiff. Section 2651(b) permits the United States to enforce this right by participating in a suit brought by the injured plaintiff. However, such participation must be accomplished in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff may not simply add the United States cause of action to his own complaint. If the United States wishes to seek recovery in this action, it must be made a party to the action through the usual means of intervention or joinder. Carrington v. Vanlinder, 58 Misc.2d 80, 294 N.Y.S.2d 412, 415 (1968); 42 U.S.C. § 2651 (“The United States may, to enforce this right ... intervene or join in any action or proceeding brought by the injured or deceased person ...” (emphasis added.)

The motion to amend the complaint is DENIED.

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

Related

Carrington v. Vanlinder
58 Misc. 2d 80 (New York Supreme Court, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 F.R.D. 229, 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15911, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-v-sylvester-ctd-1984.