Savko

Savko v. Borgquist

Good Law
137 F. App'x 1
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 14, 2005Nos. 04-35308, 04-35309California884 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Daryl Savko’s claims against Carl Borgquist and the United States arose from a motorcycle-car accident on September 27, 2000, on Whidbey Island Naval Air Station in Oak Harbor, Washington. The district court dismissed both of Savko’s federal cases for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Savko’s state court suit against Borgquist (Docket No. 04-35308) was removed to federal court and then dismissed because Savko failed to demonstrate that Borgquist was not acting within the scope of his employment as an active duty Naval Reserve officer at the time of the accident. Dismissals for lack of subject matter jurisdiction are reviewed de novo. McCarthy v. United States, 850 F.2d 558, 560 (9th Cir.1988). If a federal employee commits a negligent act while “acting within the scope of his office or employment,” the plaintiffs exclusive remedy is a suit against the United States in federal court under the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). 28 U.S.C. § 2679 (b)(1). If a plaintiff files a claim in state court against a federal employee, the Attorney General may, as he did here, certify that the federal employee was acting in the scope of his or her employment, remove the case to…

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.