C.F.R. » Title 39 » CHAPTER I—UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE › SUBCHAPTER N—PROCEDURES › PART 912—PROCEDURES TO ADJUDICATE CLAIMS FOR PERSONAL INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATION OF THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE

39 C.F.R. § 912.14

Conclusiveness of remedy

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

Payment by the Postal Service of the full amount claimed or acceptance by the claimant, his agent, or legal representative, of any award, compromise, or settlement made pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act, shall be final and conclusive on the claimant, his agent, or legal representative, and any other person on whose behalf or for whose benefit the claim has been presented, and shall constitute a complete release of any claim against the United States and against any employee of the Government whose act or omission gave rise to the claim by reason of the same subject matter.

[45 FR 43720, June 30, 1980]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: Lornell Wiseman v. United States, 976 F.2d 604 (9th Cir. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lornell Wiseman v. United States, 976 F.2d 604 (9th Cir. 1992). · cites it 2× “A comparison of 39 C.F.R. § 912.14 and 28 U.S.C. § 2672 underscores how the Postal Service seeks to limit options that the FTCA guarantees a claimant.”
CONTRERAS v. United States (D.N.J. 2022). · cites it 4× “§ 2672 and 39 C.F.R. § 912.14 , acceptance of the check operates as a complete release and bars recovery of any additional or future claims against the United States Postal Service and any employee of the government whose act or omission gave rise to the claim by reason of the…”
Ziler v. USA (W.D. La. 2022). · cites it 3× “§ 2672 and 39 C.F.R. § 912.14 , acceptance of this check operates as a complete release and bars recovery of any additional or future claims against the United States, the United States Postal Service or any employee whose act or omission gave 3 The First SF-95 submitted by the…”
Arnold v. Sandoval (D.N.M. 2022). “” 39 C.F.R. § 912.14 . On this topic, Mr. Arnold argues that the Government “trapped” him with “legal language” through a “technical” government procedure that, in his view, undermines the FTCA’s goal of just compensation.”
Arnold v. Sandoval (D.N.M. 2022). “” 39 C.F.R. § 912.14 . Contract law suggests that retaining a settlement check may constitute acceptance of a settlement offer.”
The Travelers Home & Marine Ins. Co. v. United States (M.D. Penn. 2025). “Subrogation under the Federal Tort Claims Act “Insurers may bring suit as subrogees under the FTCA.”
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.