Jane Doe v. United States

Good Law
510 F. App'x 614
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 27, 201311-16394California628 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff Jane Doe filed this action under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1346 , and Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcoties, 403 U.S. 388 , 91 S.Ct. 1999 , 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), against the United States and Defendant Jeffrey Kalani Cruz, a correctional officer at the Federal Detention Center in Honolulu. She appealed the district court’s order dismissing her FTCA claims for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants as to the Bivens claim. During oral argument, Plaintiff conceded her Bivens claim and those FTCA claims that relate to the allegedly negligent hiring, training, and supervision of prison employees. We therefore consider only her FTCA claim that arises from the alleged negligence of Cruz. Reviewing de novo, Alfrey v. United States, 276 F.3d 557, 561 (9th Cir.2002), we reverse the district court’s order as to that claim and remand for further proceedings.

The discretionary function exception to federal courts’ jurisdiction under the FTCA applies only if “the challenged actions involve an ‘element of judgment or choice.’ ” Terbush v. United States, 516 F.3d 1125,…

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.