Vickers

Vickers v. United States

Good Law
50 F. App'x 885
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 15, 2002No. 01-56005; D.C. No. CV-98-07540-SVWCalifornia589 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

In February 1996, Akanni Kendalla, an INS detention enforcement officer, shot Miriam Vickers with his service revolver during a domestic argument. Vickers appeals the district court’s determination, after a bench trial, that the INS is not hable for Vickers’ injuries under California negligence law as incorporated in the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (b). Because the district court did not clearly err in concluding that no INS negligence caused Vickers’ injuries, we affirm. See Vollendorff v. United States, 951 F.2d 215, 217 (9th Cir.1991) (issues of breach and causation are questions of fact, reviewable for clear error). Because the facts are familiar to the parties, we recount them only as necessary to explain our decision.

Vickers first argues that the INS’ negligent investigation of prior accusations against Kendalla caused her injuries. According to Vickers, a more thorough investigation would have caused the INS to deny Kendalla access to his service revolver, ultimately preventing the shooting incident between Kendalla and Vickers. The district court did not clearly err in rejecting that conclusion.

In 1994 Callada-Ramirez, in the course of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.