Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Judges

Aldabe v. Cohen, et. al

PETER J. MESSITTE JUDGE

MEMORANDUM

PETER J. MESSITTE JUDGE

After the Court granted the United States' Motion to Substitute on March 30, 2022, ECF No. 36, the United States filed a Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 39. The Court issued an Order granting the Motion on November 3, 2022, but did not issue a corresponding memorandum opinion. ECF No. 46.

On November 4, 2022, the United States sent the Court a letter requesting that it issue a revised Order explaining its bases for its granting of the United States' Motion to Dismiss (EF No. 39) so that the district court record would be clear should an appeal be noted.

The Court's bases for granting the United States' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 39) replicate those stipulated in its Memorandum Opinion granting the FTC's Motion to Substitute and other parties Motions to Dismiss. ECF No. 35. Nonetheless, the Court will address them here as well:

After the United States is substituted for a federal employee-here the FTC-the action becomes . governed by the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”): Osborn v. Haley, 549 U.S. 225,229 (2007); United States v. Smith, 499 U.S. 160,163 (1991). Although the FTCA waives the United States sovereign immunity for certain tort claims, the Act provides for various exceptions and preserves “the Government's immunity from suit for ‘[a]ny claim arising out of assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libel, slander, misrepresentation, deceit, or interference with contract rights.'” Millbrook v. United States, 569 U.S. 50,52 (2013) (emphasis added) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2680(h)).

In this case, Aldabe sues for negligent misrepresentation (Counts 1-3 and 15-16), negligent personal injury (Counts 4-10 and 13), conscious/fraudulent misrepresentation (Count 14), intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) (Count 17), and demands punitive damages (Count 19). All of these claims are excluded under the FTCA. Since the Government has not waived immunity as to such claims, Aldabe's complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Aldabe v. Cohen
(Dec 1, 2022)