Rutherford v. United States

168 F.2d 70, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2016
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedApril 14, 1948
DocketNo. 10542
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 168 F.2d 70 (Rutherford v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rutherford v. United States, 168 F.2d 70, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2016 (6th Cir. 1948).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on to be heard on the record and on the briefs and arguments of attorneys for the contending parties, and it appearing that, for the reasons stated in his memorandum opinion, 73 F.Supp. 867, the district judge correctly decided that, at the time of the automobile accident upon which the instant action was grounded, the United States Naval Petty Officer was not “acting within the scope of his office or employment” as required by the Federal Tort Claims Act, Act of Aug. 2, 1946, c. 753, Title IV, § 410, 60 Stat. 844, 28 U.S.C.A. § 931, the summary judgment dismissing the case is affirmed.

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

Related

Cobb v. United States
247 F. Supp. 505 (N.D. Illinois, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
168 F.2d 70, 1948 U.S. App. LEXIS 2016, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rutherford-v-united-states-ca6-1948.