Payne

Payne v. United States

Good Law
88 F. App'x 281
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 26, 2004No. 03-16499; D.C. No. CV-03-00179-HG-LEKCalifornia383 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Ronald Payne, a sergeant in the United States Army, appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of his action for injunctive relief and damages against the United States and Colonel Arnaldo Claudio, in which Payne alleged that Claudio violated his constitutional rights, defamed him, wrongfully assaulted and arrested him, and inflicted emotional distress. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Wilkins v. United States, 279 F.3d 782, 785 (9th Cir.2002), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Payne’s claims for damages because his claims involve the supervision or control of members of the armed forces. See Zaputil v. Cowgill, 335 F.3d 885, 887 (9th Cir.2003) (applying Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 , 71 S.Ct. 153 , 95 L.Ed. 152 (1950)). Further, the incidents complained of were incident to military service. See Lutz v. Sec’y of Air Force, 944 F.2d 1477, 1487 (9th Cir.1991). The Feres doctrine, however, does not bar Payne’s claim for injunctive relief to expunge the reprimand letter from his record. See Wilkins, 279 F.3d at 787 .

Nevertheless, because we may affirm on any ground…

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.