Notes of Decisions
Cited in
2,899
cases (
671 in the last 5 years), 1949–2026 · leading case:
Carlson v. Green, 446 U.S. 14 (1980).
Carlson v. Green, 446 U.S. 14 (1980).
· cites it 6× “28 U. S. C. § 2674 . Thus FTCA is that much less effective than a Bivens action as a deterrent to unconstitutional acts.”
Tekle Ex Rel. Tekle v. United States, 511 F.3d 839 (9th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 8× “3d at 758 (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2674 ). The FTCA provides an exception to the United States' liability for certain torts, including assault, battery, and false arrest.”
Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004).
· cites it 4× “1, 6 (1962); see also 28 U. S. C. § 2674 . The Act accordingly gives federal district courts jurisdiction over claims against the United States for injury "caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his…”
Lomando v. United States, 667 F.3d 363 (3rd Cir. 2011).
· cites it 8× “The United States contended that because a provision of the FTCA, 28 U.S.C. § 2674 , provides that the United States “shall be entitled to assert any defense based upon judicial or legislative immunity which otherwise would have been available to the employee of the United…”
Kwai Wong v. David Beebe, 732 F.3d 1030 (9th Cir. 2013).
· cites it 6× “” 28 U.S.C. § 2674 (emphasis added); see Arteaga, 711 F.”
Jaycee Dugard v. United States, 835 F.3d 915 (9th Cir. 2016).
· cites it 8× “28 U.S.C. § 2674 . The panel held that in locating an analogous private party under the FTCA, it was appropriate to look to cases involving public entities or public immunities, so long as the policies underlying them were applicable to private parties in the state as well.”
Liranzo v. United States, 690 F.3d 78 (2d Cir. 2012).
· cites it 4× “The waiver extends only to claims for which a private analogue exists — that is, the waiver extends only to claims that could be brought against a “private individual under like circumstances,” 28 U.S.C. § 2674 — permitting the government to be held liable only “under…”
Santos Ex Rel. Beato v. United States, 559 F.3d 189 (3rd Cir. 2009).
· cites it 4× “28 U.S.C. § 2674 . To make a claim under the FTCA, a claimant first must file her claim with the administrative agency allegedly responsible for her injuries.”
Fed. Aviation Admin. v. Cooper, 132 S. Ct. 1441 (2012).
· cites it 3× “” 28 U. S. C. § 2674 , ¶2. At least one court has defined “actual damages” in the Copyright Act of 1909, 17 U.”
Chadd Ex Rel. Est. of Boardman v. United States, 794 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2015).
· cites it 6× “How much slower than the speed limit should I drive in rain and fog?9 Should I trim this tree because a limb overhangs the sidewalk and could conceivably fall on a pedestrian in a windstorm?10 Or shall I leave it alone because of the aesthetic pleasure it gives to me and…”
Jam v. Int'l Fin. Corp., 139 S. Ct. 759 (2019).
· cites it 3× “§§1981 (a), 1982; Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U. S. C. §2674 . Whatever the ultimate purpose of international organization immunity may be, the immedi- ate purpose of the IOIA immunity provision is expressed in language that Congress typically uses to make one thing continuously…”
Sanchez Ex Rel. DR-S. v. United States, 671 F.3d 86 (1st Cir. 2012).
· cites it 6× “based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty on the part of a federal agency or an employee of the Government.”
Stencel Aero Eng'g Corp. v. United States, 431 U.S. 666 (1977).
· cites it 4× “We granted certiorari in this case to decide whether the United States is liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U. S. C. § 2674 , to indemnify a third party for damages paid by it to a member of the Armed Forces injured in the course of military service.”
Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. v. United States, 352 U.S. 128 (1956).
· cites it 12× “"If, however, in any case wherein death was caused, the law of the place where the act or omission complained of occurred provides, or has been construed to provide, for damages only punitive in nature, the United States shall be liable for actual or compensatory damages,…”
Lorenzo Pledger v. Loretta Lynch, 5 F.4th 511 (4th Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “’” (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2674 )). This makes sense, of course, given where we started: The FTCA as originally enacted expressly provided that 21 the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, not state procedural rules, would apply to FTCA cases.”
Lockheed Aircraft Corp. v. United States, 460 U.S. 190 (1983).
· cites it 4× “The Federal Tort Claims Act permits an indemnity action against the United States "in the same manner and to the same extent" that the action would lie against "a private individual under like circumstances.”
Dalehite v. United States, 346 U.S. 15 (1953).
· cites it 4× “" 28 U. S. C. § 2674 . This statute is another example of the progressive relaxation by legislative enactments of the rigor of the immunity rule.”
United States v. Kubrick, 444 U.S. 111 (1979).
· cites it 2× “[5] NOTES [1] Title 28 U. S. C. § 2674 provides in part: "The United States shall be liable, respecting the provisions of this title relating to tort claims, in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances, but shall not be liable for…”
Indian Towing Co. v. United States, 350 U.S. 61 (1955).
· cites it 4× “There was a further condition, 28 U. S. C. § 2674 , that the United States should be liable "in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances.”
Block v. Neal, 460 U.S. 289 (1983).
· cites it 3× “It noted that, subject to express exceptions, the Tort Claims Act, 28 U. S. C. §2674 , authorizes suit against the Government for the negligence of a federal agency in performing a voluntary undertaking.”
Corley v. United States, 11 F.4th 79 (2d Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “The Government argues that because the FTCA provides a limited waiver of sovereign immunity under which the United States is liable only “in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances,” 28 U.S.C. § 2674 , exempting Corley from §…”
Gonzalez Ex Rel. A.F. v. United States, 814 F.3d 1022 (9th Cir. 2016).
· cites it 2× “There are several exceptions to the FTCA. The exception relevant for our purposes is the discretionary function exception, which provides that the government has not waived immunity for claims based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a…”
Brownback v. King, 592 U.S. 209 (2021).
“28 U. S. C. §2674 ; see also §1346(b). It also in- cludes a provision, known as the judgment bar, which pre- cludes “any action by the [plaintiff], by reason of the same subject matter, against the employee of the government whose act or omission gave rise to the claim” if a…”
Matthews v. United States, 72 Fed. Cl. 274 (Fed. Cl. 2006).
· cites it 2× “See 28 U.S.C. § 2674 (stating that “[t]he United States shall be liable, respecting the provisions of this title relating to tort claims, in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances” (emphasis added)).”
Cortez v. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, 585 F. Supp. 2d 1273 (D.N.M. 2007).
· cites it 6× “y maintain a cause of action against the Defendants Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and John Wright in his official capacity in federal court; (ii) whether the Court should replace by interlineation the EEOC and Wright, in his official capacity, with the United…”
Limbaugh v. Coffee Med. Ctr., 59 S.W.3d 73 (Tenn. 2001).
· cites it 2× “" 28 U.S.C. § 2674 (1994). However, this waiver of immunity does not apply to "[a]ny claim arising out of assault, battery," or other enumerated intentional torts.”
Carlos Zelaya v. United States, 781 F.3d 1315 (11th Cir. 2015).
· cites it 2× “122 (“[T]he statutory language [of 28 U.S.C. § 2674 ] is ‘under like circumstances,’ and it is hornbook tort law that one who undertakes to warn the public of danger and thereby induces reliance must perform his ‘[G]ood Samaritan’ task in a careful manner.”
Vanhoy v. United States, 514 F.3d 447 (5th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 5× “The government then filed a motion in limine, asserting that, in the event of an award for future medical expenses, “the government is entitled to be treated in the same manner and to the same extent as a private health care provider under like circumstances” pursuant to 28…”
Webb v. Hamidullah, 281 F. App'x 159 (4th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 2× “See 28 U.S.C. § 2674 . 4 wounds.5 While awaiting his initial designation to a federal prison facility, Webb was hospitalized for hernia complications and kidney failure.”
First Nat'l City Bank v. Banco Para El Comercio Exterior De Cuba, 462 U.S. 611 (1983).
· cites it 2× “§ 1606 , see supra, at 620, contains language identical to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U. S. C. § 2674 , Bancec also contends alternatively that the FSIA, like the FTCA, requires application of the law of the forum State here New York including its conflicts…”
Mark Munns v. John F. Kerry, 782 F.3d 402 (9th Cir. 2015).
· cites it 2× “The family members contend that the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. § 2674 , waives sovereign immunity for their claims.”
Santoni v. Postmaster Gen., 369 F.3d 594 (1st Cir. 2004).
· cites it 2× “” 28 U.S.C. § 2674 . Certain types of intentional torts are exempted from the FTCA’s waiver of sovereign immunity, but the statute allows claims against the United States for the torts of “assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious…”
Pleasant v. United States Ex Rel. Overton Brooks Vets. Admin. Hosp., 764 F.3d 445 (5th Cir. 2014).
· cites it 4× “28 U.S.C. §§ 2674 , 2679(a). Plaintiffs may recover against the United States and its agencies under the FTCA “in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances” under substantive state law.”
San Juan Cnty., Utah v. United States, 503 F.3d 1163 (10th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 2× “tates without license of the owner thereof or lawful right to use or manufacture the same," but specifying that "any patentee or any assignee of such patentee" has no right to sue "with respect to any invention discovered or invented by a person while in the employment or…”
United States Marine, Inc. v. United States, 722 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2013).
· cites it 3× “28 U.S.C. § 2674 (“The United States shall be liable, respecting the provisions of this title relating to tort claims, in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances.”
Weiss, 155 Ct. Cl. 825 (Ct. Cl. 1961).
Barker (E.D. La. 2026).
· cites it 3×
Natour (S.D. Tex. 2026).
· cites it 3×
Nadie (E.D. Pa. 2025).
· cites it 2×
Parada (D. Maryland 2025).
· cites it 2×
Wije (W.D. Tex. 2025).
· cites it 2×
Kittle (M.D. Tenn. 2026).
· cites it 2×
Maker (D. Maryland 2025).
— 28 U.S.C. § 2674(a) — 1 case
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.