28 C.F.R. § 14.2

Administrative claim; when presented

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) For purposes of the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 2401(b), 2672, and 2675, a claim shall be deemed to have been presented when a Federal agency receives from a claimant, his duly authorized agent or legal representative, an executed Standard Form 95 or other written notification of an incident, accompanied by a claim for money damages in a sum certain for injury to or loss of property, personal injury, or death alleged to have occurred by reason of the incident; and the title or legal capacity of the person signing, and is accompanied by evidence of his authority to present a claim on behalf of the claimant as agent, executor, administrator, parent, guardian, or other representative.

(b)(1) A claim shall be presented to the Federal agency whose activities gave rise to the claim. When a claim is presented to any other Federal agency, that agency shall transfer it forthwith to the appropriate agency, if the proper agency can be identified from the claim, and advise the claimant of the transfer. If transfer is not feasible the claim shall be returned to the claimant. The fact of transfer shall not, in itself, preclude further transfer, return of the claim to the claimant or other appropriate disposition of the claim. A claim shall be presented as required by 28 U.S.C. 2401(b) as of the date it is received by the appropriate agency.

(2) When more than one Federal agency is or may be involved in the events giving rise to the claim, an agency with which the claim is filed shall contact all other affected agencies in order to designate the single agency which will thereafter investigate and decide the merits of the claim. In the event that an agreed upon designation cannot be made by the affected agencies, the Department of Justice shall be consulted and will thereafter designate an agency to investigate and decide the merits of the claim. Once a determination has been made, the designated agency shall notify the claimant that all future correspondence concerning the claim shall be directed to that Federal agency. All involved Federal agencies may agree either to conduct their own administrative reviews and to coordinate the results or to have the investigations conducted by the designated Federal agency, but, in either event, the designated Federal agency will be responsible for the final determination of the claim.

(3) A claimant presenting a claim arising from an incident to more than one agency should identify each agency to which the claim is submitted at the time each claim is presented. Where a claim arising from an incident is presented to more than one Federal agency without any indication that more than one agency is involved, and any one of the concerned Federal agencies takes final action on that claim, the final action thus taken is conclusive on the claims presented to the other agencies in regard to the time required for filing suit set forth in 28 U.S.C. 2401(b). However, if a second involved Federal agency subsequently desires to take further action with a view towards settling the claim the second Federal agency may treat the matter as a request for reconsideration of the final denial under 28 CFR 14.9(b), unless suit has been filed in the interim, and so advise the claimant.

(4) If, after an agency final denial, the claimant files a claim arising out of the same incident with a different Federal agency, the new submission of the claim will not toll the requirement of 28 U.S.C. 2401(b) that suit must be filed within six months of the final denial by the first agency, unless the second agency specifically and explicitly treats the second submission as a request for reconsideration under 28 CFR 14.9(b) and so advises the claimant.

(c) A claim presented in compliance with paragraph (a) of this section may be amended by the claimant at any time prior to final agency action or prior to the exercise of the claimant's option under 28 U.S.C. 2675(a). Amendments shall be submitted in writing and signed by the claimant or his duly authorized agent or legal representative. Upon the timely filing of an amendment to a pending claim, the agency shall have six months in which to make a final disposition of the claim as amended and the claimant's option under 28 U.S.C. 2675(a) shall not accrue until six months after the filing of an amendment.

[Order No. 870-79, 45 FR 2650, Jan. 14, 1980, as amended by Order No. 960-81, 46 FR 52355, Oct. 27, 1981; Order No. 1179-87, 52 FR 7411, Mar. 11, 1987]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 792 cases (302 in the last 5 years), 1969–2026 · leading case: Est. of Eleusipa Van Emburgh v. United States, 95 F.4th 795 (4th Cir. 2024).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Est. of Eleusipa Van Emburgh v. United States, 95 F.4th 795 (4th Cir. 2024). · cites it 12× “In both of those cases, our discussion of the jurisdictional requirement cited both the statutory basis for the administrative exhaustion requirement and the expression of the “sum certain” requirement in 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (a), an Attorney General regulation enacted pursuant to §…”

Mader v. United States, 654 F.3d 794 (8th Cir. 2011). · cites it 7× “Purportedly acting pursuant to Congress’s grant of rulemaking authority in § 2672, the Attorney General promulgated 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (a) to define the presentment requirement.”

Ortiz-Rivera v. United States, 891 F.3d 20 (1st Cir. 2018). · cites it 7× “A regulation, 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (a), promulgated by the United States Department of Justice fleshes out parts of this requirement.”

Judith Odin v. United States, 656 F.2d 798 (D.C. Cir. 1981). · cites it 12× “The government also argues that it properly refused to consider appellant’s amended claim because it was untimely under the pertinent regulation, 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (b). That regulation provides: 21 A claim presented in compliance with paragraph (a) of this section may be amended…”

White-Squire v. United States Postal Serv., 592 F.3d 453 (3rd Cir. 2010). · cites it 5× “§ 2675 (a), (b); 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (a). The District Court granted the USPS’s motion and dismissed the case, concluding that White-Squire’s failure to submit a sum *456 certain claim deprived it of subject matter jurisdiction.”

Gaf Corp. v. United States of Am.. Keene Corp. v. United States of Am.. Eagle-Picher Indus., Inc. v. United States, 818 F.2d 901 (D.C. Cir. 1987). · cites it 6× “See 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (a) (1985). A Standard Form 95, titled "Claim for Damage, Injury or Death," is a two-sided form requesting the details of tort claims against the United States.”

Smoke Shop, LLC v. United States, 761 F.3d 779 (7th Cir. 2014). · cites it 5× “28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (a); see also Kanar v. United States, 118 F.”

Gary L. Adams v. United States, 615 F.2d 284 (5th Cir. 1980). · cites it 7× “In accordance with 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 the Adams submitted their claim on a completed standard Form 95 to an Air Force claims officer at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida.”

Charles Barnett v. Okeechobee Hosp., 283 F.3d 1232 (11th Cir. 2002). · cites it 5× “” 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (2001). 5 Accordingly, Barnett must show either that his Notice of Intent letter met these two requirements — written notification and a claim for a sum certain — or that the VA received the SF95 he filled out.”

Anna Chronis v. United States, 932 F.3d 544 (7th Cir. 2019). · cites it 4× “” 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (a); see also Kanar, 118 F.”

Michael Redlin v. United States, 921 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 2019). · cites it 10× “28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (c). The panel further held that if the second claim was deemed a request for reconsideration, it was not timely because it was received by the VA more than six months after the VA mailed its notice of final denial of his claim, and the second ** This summary…”

Mary E. Tucker v. United States Postal Serv., 676 F.2d 954 (3rd Cir. 1982). · cites it 5× “§ 2672 the Attorney General has promulgated regulations governing administrative claims adjustment, among them 28 C.F.R. § 14.2 (a) (1980): For purposes of the provisions of section 2672 of Title 28, United States Code, a claim shall be deemed to have been presented when a…”

Show all 792 citing cases →

— 28 C.F.R. § 14.2(a) — 36 cases

Christine Roth Melo v. United States, 505 F.2d 1026 (8th Cir. 1974).

Coy Allen & Esther Allen v. United States, 517 F.2d 1328 (6th Cir. 1975).

Hilario Molinar v. United States, 515 F.2d 246 (5th Cir. 1975).

Allen v. Brown, 185 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2016).

Rispoli v. United States, 576 F. Supp. 1398 (E.D.N.Y 1983).

— 28 C.F.R. § 14.2(b) — 1 case

McCormick v. United States, 539 F. Supp. 1179 (D. Colo. 1982).

— 28 C.F.R. § 14.2(b)(1) — 3 cases

Melvin Kanar v. United States, 118 F.3d 527 (7th Cir. 1997).

Blazavich v. United States, 29 Fed. Cl. 371 (Fed. Cl. 1993).

Oquendo-Ayala v. United States (1st Cir. 1999).

— 28 C.F.R. § 14.2(b)(2) — 1 case

Flores v. Nat'l Park Serv. (N.D. Cal. 2025).

— 28 C.F.R. § 14.2(b)(3) — 1 case

Flores v. Nat'l Park Serv. (N.D. Cal. 2025).

— 28 C.F.R. § 14.2(c) — 6 cases

Stokes v. U.S. Postal Serv., 937 F. Supp. 11 (D.D.C. 1996).

Accolla v. United States Gov't, 369 F. App'x 408 (3rd Cir. 2010).

Nanouk v. United States (D. Alaska 2023).

TORRES v. United States (E.D. Pa. 2022).

Madrid v. United States (N.D. Tex. 2023).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.