Summary
Too many concurrent requests.
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Tacha; Kane; Moore
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
February 22, 1990
Procedural posture
Appeal from summary judgment in favor of the United States in a Federal Tort Claims Act action.
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Explosive Transports, Inc. v. United States
Disposition
affirmed
Topics
tortsappellate proceduresummary judgmentcivil procedure
Practice areas
Federal Tort Claims ActDiscretionary Function Exception
Questions Presented
- Whether the government's conduct in designing the bombs falls within the discretionary function exception to the FTCA, thereby barring ETI's claim.
- Whether the district court erred in foreclosing discovery before ETI could ascertain a violation of a nondiscretionary duty.
Holdings
- The government's design of the 2000 pound bombs and its administration of truck compliance testing are discretionary functions not subject to FTCA liability.
Key quotations
“We think that the selection of the appropriate design for military equipment to be used by our Armed Forces is assuredly a discretionary function within the meaning of [section 2680(a) ]. It often involves not merely engineering analysis but judgment as to the balancing of many technical, military, and even social considerations, including specifically the trade-off between greater safety and greater combat effectiveness.” (at 313)
“the discretionary function exception bars any claims that challenge the Bureau's formulation of policy as to the appropriate way in which to regulate the release of vaccine lots. In addition, if the policies and programs formulated by the Bureau allow room for implementing officials to make independent policy judgments, the discretionary function exception protects the acts taken by those officials in the exercise of this discretion.” (at 314)
“The FAA's implementation of a mechanism for compliance review is plainly discretionary activity of the 'nature and quality' protected by § 2680(a). When an agency determines the extent to which it will supervise the safety procedures of private individuals, it is exercising discretionary authority of the most basic kind.... It follows that the acts of FAA employees in executing the 'spot-check' program in accordance with agency directives are protected by the discretionary exception as well.” (at 314)
Factual background
A truck operated by ETI was transporting ten 2000 pound bombs under contract with the government when it was rear-ended by a car. The car's fuel tank ruptured on impact, causing both the car and the truck to catch fire. The heat from the fire caused three of the ten bombs to explode, resulting in extensive property damage.
Procedural history
The district court granted summary judgment against Explosive Transports, Inc. on its FTCA claim, finding that the government's conduct fell within the discretionary function exception. ETI appealed.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…