Martinez

Martinez v. United States

Good Law
356 F. App'x 979
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 14, 2009No. 08-15948California403 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Daniel Gabino Martinez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his tort action against the United States for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Billings v. United States, 57 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir.1995) (certification by the Attorney General, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2679 (d)(1), that named defendant was federal employee acting within the scope of her employment). We affirm.

Martinez filed this action in Arizona state court against employees of the United States Forest Service, alleging unlawful seizure of his cattle.

“When a federal employee is sued for wrongful or negligent conduct, the [West-fall] Act empowers the Attorney General to certify that the employee was acting within the scope of his office or employment. ... [T]he United States is substituted as defendant in place of the employee. The litigation is thereafter governed by the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”). If the action commenced in state court, the case is to be removed to a federal district court, and the certification remains conclusive for purposes of removal.” Osborn v. Haley, 549 U.S. 225, 229-30 ,…

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.