Feres v. United States

rdf:langString Feres v. United States

rdf:langString

rdf:langString Feres, Executrix, v. United States, Jefferson v. United States; United States v. Griggs, Executrix

rdf:langString unanimous

rdf:langString On writs of certiorari to the Courts of Appeals for the Second, Fourth, and Tenth Circuits, 339 U.S. 910, 339 U.S. 951

rdf:langString Feres v. United States,

rdf:langString Feres, Executrix, v. United States, Jefferson v. United States; United States v. Griggs, Executrix

rdf:langString The Federal Tort Claims Act did not apply to claims by petitioner servicemen; 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.

rdf:langString Feres v. United States

rdf:langString Jackson

rdf:langString Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), combined three pending federal cases for a hearing in certiorari in which the Supreme Court of the United States held 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 collecting damages from the United States Government for personal injuries experienced 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, 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. There have been exceptions to the Feres doctrine where active duty members have been allowed to sue for injuries when the court found that civilians could have been harmed in the same manner under the same circumstances in which the service member's injuries occurred. Injuries experienced by service members while on active duty are covered by various Department of Veterans Affairs benefits legislation. The effect of the doctrine was substantially limited by a change in the law made by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, which created an administrative process to hear claims of medical malpractice.

rdf:langString Douglas