Paul O. Richter, Daniel J. Ferguson, and Elsie Elizabeth Scofield, Plaintiffs v. United States

Ninth Circuit

Paul O. Richter, Daniel J. Ferguson, and Elsie Elizabeth Scofield, Plaintiffs v. United States

551 F.2d 1177, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 13922

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 8, 1977·No. 75-2651·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ action under the Federal Torts Claim Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) (1970), on the ground that it was barred by the two-year statute of limitations. 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) (1970). They appeal. The facts which are alleged present a striking parallel to those found in Hammond v. United States, E.D.N.Y., 1975, 388 F.Supp. 928. We are not bound by that decision, but we are convinced that Judge Platt’s careful opinion in that case is correct and we affirm on the basis of his reasoning. See also, Brown v. United States, 9 Cir., 1965, 353 F.2d 578.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

The district court dismissed plaintiffs’ action under the Federal Torts Claim Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) (1970), on the ground that it was barred by the two-year statute of limitations. 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) (1970). They appeal. The facts which are alleged present a striking parallel to those found in Hammond v. United States, E.D.N.Y., 1975, 388 F.Supp. 928. We are not bound by that decision, but we are convinced that Judge Platt’s careful opinion in that case is correct and we affirm on the basis of his reasoning. See also, Brown v. United States, 9 Cir., 1965, 353 F.2d 578.

Affirmed.

Paul O. Richter, Daniel J. Ferguson, and Elsie Elizabeth Scofield, Plaintiffs v. United States, 551 F.2d 1177, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 13922 (9th Cir. 1977).

Pincite

551 F.2d 1177 (Paul O. Richter, Daniel J. Ferguson, and Elsie Elizabeth Scofield, Plaintiffs v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related