Beavers v. United States, Civ. A. No. 68-H-679.
| Decision Date | 30 October 1968 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 68-H-679. |
| Citation | 291 F. Supp. 856 |
| Parties | Billy Steve BEAVERS, Plaintiff. v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas |
Rudolf E Gaulke, Houston, Tex., for plaintiff.
William B. Butler, Asst. U. S. Atty., Houston, Tex., for defendant.
Plaintiff brought this action for damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act, Title 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b), 2671 et seq., alleging that he sustained injuries when a truck being driven by an employee of the United States Post Office Department collided with the automobile which he was driving. This collision is alleged to have occurred on or about June 16, 1967. The defendant has filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R. Civ.P. 12(b) alleging that this Court is without jurisdiction in that plaintiff has never filed a claim with the United States Post Office Department pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a).
Title 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a), as amended July 18, 1966, Pub.L. 89-506, § 2, 80 Stat. 306, has not been subjected to interpretation in any published opinion. Prior to that amendment the statute read as follows:
"An action shall not be instituted upon a claim against the United States which has been presented to a federal agency, for money damages for injury or loss of property or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the government while acting within the scope of his authority, unless such federal agency has made final disposition of the claim."
The decisions interpreting the above quoted statute have held that the filing of an administrative claim is not a prerequisite to filing or maintaining a civil action under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Schlingman v. United States, 229 F.Supp. 454 (S.D.Cal.1963); Whistler v. United States, 252 F.Supp. 913 (D.C.Ind. 1966).
The present case is controlled by the statute as amended July, 1966, which provides as follows:
"An action shall not be instituted upon a claim against the United States for money damages for injury or loss of property or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment, unless the claimant shall have first presented the claim to the appropriate Federal agency * * *".
It is the opinion of this Court that the clear language of the amended statute dictates the conclusion that filing...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Magellsen v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
...prior to the 1966 amendment. After the 1966 amendment, the district court for the Southern District of Texas, in Beavers v. United States, 291 F.Supp. 856 (S.D.Tex.1968), ruled that, in a suit against a post office for damages in an automobile accident, no action could be initiated in feder......
-
Turtzo v. United States
...v. United States, 307 F.Supp. 1191 (N.D.Ga.1969); Gunstream v. United States, 307 F.Supp. 366 (C.D.Cal.1969); Beavers v. United States, 291 F.Supp. 856 (S.D.Tex.1968). Plaintiffs contend that they fulfilled this requirement in that they notified the United States Army through the office of ......
-
Driggers v. United States, Civ. A. No. 69-740.
...claim is now required before a suit against the United States may be maintained under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Beavers v. United States, 291 F.Supp. 856 (S.D.Tex.1968). The plaintiffs contend that they should be relieved of the necessity to file administrative claims in the circumstance......
-
Gutelius v. United States, Civ. A. No. 436-69-N.
...claim is now a prerequisite to filing or maintaining a civil action under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Beavers v. United States, 291 F.Supp. 856 (S.D.Texas, 1968). Such a conclusion is amply supported by the legislative history accompanying the amendment. U.S. Code Cong. and Ad.News, p. 251......