Shew v. United States, Civ. No. 112.
| Decision Date | 04 November 1953 |
| Docket Number | Civ. No. 112. |
| Citation | 116 F. Supp. 1 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of North Carolina |
| Parties | SHEW v. UNITED STATES. |
Hayes & Hayes, and J. Alley Hayes, North Wilkesboro, N. C., for plaintiff.
Bryce R. Holt, U. S. Atty., Greensboro, N. C., Theodore C. Bethea, Asst. U. S. Atty., Reidsville, N. C., for defendant.
Plaintiff, Richard Shew, has instituted this action against the United States of America for damages for personal injuries allegedly suffered and sustained by him, while confined in the United States penitentiary at Atlanta, Georgia, in which action he invokes the jurisdiction of this court under the provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1346(b), and 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 2671-2680.
Among other things plaintiff alleges his incarceration on account of a conviction and sentence resulting therefrom and sets out that while confined he was assigned to work in and around the various piggeries maintained by the institution as a method of employment for those confined and a possible means of making a profit. He bottoms his action on the alleged negligence of the defendant through its employees at said institution, in alleging among other things, that he, along with others, was engaged in transporting and delivering hog food to the various lots where the pigs were kept, and that he was riding on top of a load of such food contained in 100 lb. bags, placed on a truck. That for some reason unknown to him, the truck, from a mechanical defect, stopped on the roadway. That the employees of the government in charge of the truck and some of the prisoners began work on the motor and that plaintiff, in getting down from the top of the load of sacked feed, caught his foot in a wire and was thrown violently to the ground, breaking his left leg and otherwise injuring himself and suffered great pain in both body and mind. It is alleged that the truck was what is known in the trade as a panel truck and that that portion of the panel immediately to the rear of the cab had not been removed, though the side and rear panels had been taken off, and on this unmoved part certain bailing wire had been left which had originally been placed there for the purpose of tying the panel joints together when needed. His treatment is alleged and permanent injury resulting proximately therefrom is set out with damage claimed in the sum of $10,000.
The United States denied certain of the material allegations, makes admission of others, and asks that no damage be recovered of it.
The government further alleges in its answer that the complaint fails to set up a claim upon which relief can be granted and moves therefore to dismiss the action.
I will take up this motion to dismiss the action as first of the defenses...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Muniz
...29, 1958; Trostle v. United States, No. 1493, D.C.W.D.Mo., Feb. 20, 1958; Van Zuch v. United States, D.C., 118 F.Supp. 468; Shew v. United States, D.C., 116 F.Supp. 1; Sigmon v. United States, D.C., 110 F.Supp. 906; Ellison v. United States, No. 1003, D.C.W.D.N.C., July 26, 5 August 2, 1946......
-
Winston v. United States
...Berman v. United States, 170 F. Supp. 107 (E.D.N.Y.1959); Van Zuch v. United States, 118 F.Supp. 468 (E.D. N.Y.1954); Shew v. United States, 116 F.Supp. 1 (M.D.N.C.1953); and Sigmon v. United States, 110 F.Supp. 906 (W.D. Va.1953). However, our evaluation of the factors pertinent to the pro......
-
Garza v. United States
...law a person is not liable without proof of actionable negligence. Nicholson v. Tacker, 512 P.2d 156 (Okl.1973). In Shew v. United States, 116 F.Supp. 1 (M.D.N.C. 1953) and Van Zuch v. United States, 118 F.Supp. 468 (ED NY 1954) the Government was held not liable for prisoner injuries becau......
-
Lawrence v. United States, Civ. A. No. 945.
...63; Jones v. United States, 7 Cir., 1957, 249 F.2d 864; Sigmon v. United States, D.C.W.D.Va.1953, 110 F.Supp. 906; Shew v. United States, D.C.M.D. N.C.1953, 116 F.Supp. 1; Van Zuch v. United States, D.C.E.D.N.Y.1954, 118 F. Supp. 468; and, Berman v. United States, D.C.E.D.N.Y.1959, 170 F.Su......
-
The Fat Prisoners' Dilemma: Slow Violence, Intersectionality, and a Disability Rights Framework for the Future
...(“[T]here is no right of action against the United States [by a prisoner] under the Federal Tort Claims Act.”); Shew v. United States, 116 F. Supp. 1, 2–3 (M.D.N.C. 1953); Sigmon v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 906, 911 (W.D. Va. 1953) (“To permit federal prisoners to avail themselves of the......