Feres v. United States

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=Feres v. United States
ArgueDateA=October 12
ArgueDateB=13
ArgueYear=1950
DecideDate=December 4
DecideYear=1950
FullName=Feres, Executrix, v. United States, Jefferson v. United States; United States v. Griggs, Executrix
USVol=340
USPage=135
Citation=71 S. Ct. 153; 95 L. Ed. 152; 1950 U.S. LEXIS 1352
Prior=On writs of certiorari to the Courts of Appeals for the Second, Fourth, and Tenth Circuits, 339 U.S. 910, 339 U.S. 951
Subsequent=On remand: 177 F.2d 535 and 178 F.2d 518, affirmed; 178 F.2d 1, reversed
Holding=The Court affirmed the decisions of the courts of appeals which held that the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) did not apply to claims by petitioner servicemen. The Court reversed the judgment of the court of appeals which extended the FTCA remedy to active duty servicemen. The Court held that respondent United States was not liable under the FTCA for injuries to servicemen arising out of or in the course of activity incident to service.
SCOTUS=1949-1953
Majority=Jackson
JoinMajority="unanimous"
Concurrence=Douglas
LawsApplied=Federal Tort Claims Act

"Feres v. United States", 340 U.S. 135 (1950), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries to members of the armed forces sustained while on active duty and not on furlough and resulting from the negligence of others in the armed forces. The opinion is an extension of the English common-law concept of sovereign immunity.

The practical effect is that the "Feres doctrine" effectively bars service members from successfully collecting damages for personal injuries, whether or not they were suffered in the performance of their duties. It also bars families of service members from filing wrongful death or loss of consortium actions when a service member is killed or injured. The bar does not extend to killed or injured family members, so a spouse or child may still sue the United States for tort claims (such as medical malpractice), nor does it bar service members from filing either in loco parentis on their child's behalf or filing for wrongful death or loss of consortium as a companion claim to a spouse or child's suit.

ee also

* List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 340

External links

* [http://supreme.justia.com/us/340/135/case.html Full text opinion from Justia.com]