U.S. Code » Title 22 » Chapter CHAPTER 38— DEPARTMENT OF STATE

22 U.S.C. § 2702

Malpractice protection

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 22 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Exclusiveness of designated remediesThe remedy—(1) against the United States provided by sections 1346(b) and 2672 of title 28, or(2) through proceedings for compensation or other benefits from the United States as provided by any other law, where the availability of such benefits precludes a remedy under such sections,for damages for personal injury, including death, allegedly arising from malpractice or negligence of a physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or paramedical (including medical and dental assistants and technicians, nursing assist­ants, and therapists) or other supporting personnel of the Department of State in furnishing medical care or related services, including the conducting of clinical studies or investigations, while in the exercise of his or her duties in or for the Department of State or any other Federal department, agency, or instrumentality shall be exclusive of any other civil action or proceeding by reason of the same subject matter against such physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or paramedical or other supporting personnel (or his or her estate) whose act or omission gave rise to such claim.(b) Defense of civil actions by United States; delivery of process; furnishing of copies of pleadings

The United States Government shall defend any civil action or proceeding brought in any court against any person referred to in subsection (a) of this section (or his or her estate) for any such damage or injury. Any such person against whom such civil action or proceeding is brought shall deliver, within such time after date of service or knowledge of service as may be determined by the Attorney General, all process served upon him or her or an attested true copy thereof to whomever was designated by the Secretary to receive such papers. Such person shall promptly furnish copies of the pleading and process therein to the United States attorney for the district embracing the place wherein the proceeding is brought, to the Attorney General, and to the Secretary.

(c) Removal of actions; remand or dismissal; suspension of limitations

Upon a certification by the Attorney General that the defendant was acting within the scope of his or her employment in or for the Department of State or any other Federal department, agency, or instrumentality at the time of the incident out of which the suit arose, any such civil action or proceeding commenced in a State court shall be removed without bond at any time before trial by the Attorney General to the district court of the United States of the district and division embracing the place wherein it is pending and the proceeding deemed a tort action brought against the United States under the provisions of title 28, and all references thereto. Should a United States district court determine on a hearing on a motion to remand held before a trial on the merits that the case so removed is one in which a remedy by suit within the meaning of subsection (a) of this section is not available against the United States, the case shall be remanded to the State court except that where such remedy is precluded because of the availability of a remedy through proceedings for compensation or other benefits from the United States as provided by any other law, the case shall be dismissed, but in that event, the running of any limitation of time for commencing, or filing an application or claim in, such proceedings for compensation or other benefits shall be deemed to have been suspended during the pendency of the civil action or proceeding under this section.

(d) Compromise or settlement of claims

The Attorney General may compromise or settle any claim asserted in such civil action or proceeding in the manner provided in section 2677 of title 28, and with the same effect.

(e) Inapplicability of section 2680(h) of title 28

For purposes of this section, the provisions of section 2680(h) of title 28, shall not apply to any tort enumerated therein arising out of negligence in the furnishing of medical care or related services, including the conducting of clinical studies or investigations.

(f) Holding harmless or providing for liability insurance

The Secretary may, to the extent he deems appropriate, hold harmless or provide liability insurance for any person to whom the immunity provisions of subsection (a) of this section apply, for damages for personal injury, including death, negligently caused by any such person while acting within the scope of his or her office or employment and as a result of the furnishing of medical care or related services, including the conducting of clinical studies or investigations, if such person is assigned to a foreign area or detailed for service with other than a Federal agency or institution, or if the circumstances are such as are likely to preclude the remedies of third persons against the United States provided by sections 1346(b) and 2672 of title 28, for such damage or injury.

(g) Medical care or related service within scope of employment

For purposes of this section, any medical care or related service covered by this section and performed abroad by a covered person at the direction or with the approval of the United States chief of mission or other principal representative of the United States in the area shall be deemed to be within the scope of employment of the individual performing the service.

(Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 841, title I, § 30, as added Pub. L. 96–465, title II, § 2201(a), Oct. 17, 1980, 94 Stat. 2155; renumbered title I, Pub. L. 97–241, title II, § 202(a), Aug. 24, 1982, 96 Stat. 282.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective Feb. 15, 1981, except as otherwise provided, see section 2403 of Pub. L. 96–465, set out as a note under section 3901 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: Levin v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 1224 (2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Levin v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 1224 (2013). · cites it 2× “See 22 U. S. C. § 2702 (e) (“For purposes of this section, the provisions of [§ 2680(h)] shall not apply to any tort enumerated therein arising out of negligence in the furnishing of medical care or related services.”
United States v. Smith, 499 U.S. 160 (1991). · cites it 2× “Similar pre-immunity statutes were enacted for other medical personnel employed by the Government, including those in the State Department, see 22 U. S. C. § 2702 , the Veterans' Administration, see 38 U.”
Brignac v. United States, 239 F. Supp. 3d 1367 (N.D. Ga. 2017). “§ 20137 (a); 22 U.S.C. § 2702 (a); 38 U.S.C. § 7316 (a).”
Mildred M. Newman, & Melvin D. Newman v. Peter Soballe, M.D., 871 F.2d 969 (11th Cir. 1989). · cites it 2× “§ 4116 , and *971 the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, 22 U.S.C. § 2702 . These immunity statutes, however, do not necessarily apply to every situation concerning a suit against a federal employee and careful consideration must be given to each statute to see whether it…”
Castaneda Ex Rel. Est. of Castaneda v. United States, 546 F.3d 682 (9th Cir. 2008). “Others specify in the text only a “negligent or wrongful act or omission.” 10 U.S.C. § 1089 (a) (Department of Defense, Armed Forces Retirement Home, and Central Intelligence Agency medical personnel); 42 U.”
Nicholas Nasuti v. James Scannell, 792 F.2d 264 (1st Cir. 1986). “1984); State Department employees, 22 U.S.C. § 2702 (1982); Department of Medicine and Surgery employees, 38 U.”
Wheeler Tarpeh-Doe v. United States, 771 F. Supp. 427 (D.D.C. 1991). “Moreover, the Foreign Affairs Statute provides that an action against the United States under the FTCA is the exclusive remedy for a claim for damages for personal injury allegedly arising from the negligence of “supporting personnel of the Department of State in furnishing…”
Barrera v. Honor Health Emergency Ctr. - Deer Valley (D. Ariz. 2021). · cites it 2× “3 Plaintiff asserts the Court has federal question jurisdiction over his claims, citing 4 only 22 U.S.C. § 2702 . (ECF No. 1 at 3). The factual basis for Plaintiff’s claim is as 5 follows: 6 On 9/20/21, and 9/24/21, respectively, I went to the Honor Health Emergency Center –…”
Holmes v. Hollis (E.D. La. 2023). · cites it 2× “Plaintiff further claims the Court can exercise federal question jurisdiction over this case because she brings a claim against Defendants under 22 U.S.C. § 2702 . The Court disagrees because Plaintiff’s claim under this statute is frivolous.”
Blades v. Dejoseph (D.N.J. 2020). · cites it 2× “In his pro se Complaint, Plaintiff attempts to assert claims for medical malpractice, pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 2702 . Along with his Complaint, Plaintiff filed an application for permission to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”)[Dkt.”
Parkes v. NYU Langone Health (S.D.N.Y. 2025). · cites it 2× “Plaintiff invokes 22 U.S.C. § 2702 , but that statute pertains only “to actions for malpractice of physicians who work for the Department of State or any other federal department, agency or instrumentality.”
Parkes v. NYU Langone Health (S.D.N.Y. 2025). · cites it 2× “) Plaintiff asserted that Defendants violated her rights under 22 U.S.C. § 2702 , and she sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
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.