John Doe v. United States of America

64 U.S.L.W. 2078 (9th Cir. 1995) · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · June 29, 1995 · No. Nos. 93-56367, 94-55552

Summary

The Ninth Circuit consolidated appeals involving John Doe’s Federal Tort Claims Act and contract claims against the United States arising from the FBI’s disclosure of his identity as an informant. The court held that the district court improperly dismissed the tort claims with prejudice without allowing amendment or discovery into jurisdictional facts. It also held that, for bankruptcy setoff purposes, the United States generally constitutes a single governmental unit and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

  1. When a complaint is dismissed for failure to state a claim, the district court must grant leave to amend unless it determines that the pleading could not possibly be cured by alleging additional facts. Because the district court made no such determination and gave no justification for dismissing the FTCA claims with prejudice, dismissal without leave to amend was improper.
  2. Because the FTCA case was improperly dismissed and was not res judicata, the district court could not dismiss the bankruptcy setoff proceeding on res judicata grounds; the possibility of a setoff remained open.
  3. For purposes of sovereign-immunity waiver and setoff under 11 U.S.C. § 106, all agencies of the United States, except agencies acting in a distinctive private capacity, are treated as a single governmental unit.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court improperly dismissed Doe's FTCA claims with prejudice without granting leave to amend or allowing discovery concerning the location of the alleged tort.
  2. Whether res judicata barred Doe from asserting his tort claims as a setoff against the IRS's bankruptcy claims.
  3. Whether, under 11 U.S.C. § 106(b), the United States and its agencies are treated as a single governmental unit for purposes of offsetting a judgment against the IRS's allowed tax claims.
  4. Whether the related contract claim should be returned to the Court of Federal Claims while the FTCA and bankruptcy setoff claims remained pending.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (22)

  • Schreiber Distributing Co. v. Serv-Well Furniture Co., 806 F.2d 1393 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
  • Indian Towing Co. v. United States, 350 U.S. 61 (1955)(followed)
  • Cook, Perkiss & Liehe, Inc. v. Northern California Collection Service, Inc., 911 F.2d 242 (9th Cir. 1990)(followed)
  • Bonanno v. Thomas, 309 F.2d 320 (9th Cir. 1962)(followed)
  • Luther v. United States, 225 F.2d 495 (10th Cir. 1954)(followed)
  • Small Business Administration v. McClellan, 364 U.S. 446 (1960)(followed)
  • Frigard v. United States, 862 F.2d 201 (9th Cir. 1988)(distinguished_from)
  • Berkovitz v. United States, 486 U.S. 531 (1988)(followed)
  • United States v. Gaubert, 499 U.S. 315 (1991)(followed)
  • Kennewick Irrigation District v. United States, 880 F.2d 1018 (9th Cir. 1989)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 22.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…