.svg) | |
| Long title | Title IV of an Act “To provide for increased efficiency in the legislative branch of the Government”. |
|---|---|
| Enacted by | the79th United States Congress |
| Effective | August 2, 1946; 79 years ago (1946-08-02) |
| Citations | |
| Public law | Pub. L. 79–601 |
| Statutes at Large | 60 Stat. 812through 60 Stat. 852 (40 pages) |
| Legislative history | |
| |
| United States Supreme Court cases | |
| Feres v. United States Millbrook v. United States | |
TheFederal Tort Claims Act (August 2, 1946, ch. 646, Title IV, 60 Stat. 812,28 U.S.C. Part VI, Chapter 171 and28 U.S.C. § 1346) ("FTCA") is a 1946federal statute that permits private parties to sue theUnited States in afederal court for mosttorts committed by persons acting on behalf of the United States. It was passed and enacted as a part of theLegislative Reorganization Act of 1946.
Under the FTCA, "[T]he United States [is] liable ... in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances, but [is not] liable for interest prior to judgment or for punitive damages."28 U.S.C. § 2674. Federal courts have jurisdiction over such claims, but apply the law of the state "where the act or omission occurred".28 U.S.C. § 1346(b). Thus, both federal and state law may impose limitations on liability. The FTCA exempts, among other things, claims based upon the performance of or failure to perform a "discretionary function or duty".[1] The FTCA also exempts a number ofintentional torts. However, the FTCA does not exempt intentional torts committed by "investigative or law enforcement officers", thus allowing individuals aggrieved by the actions of law enforcement officers to have their day in court.[2] The Supreme Court affirmed this so-called "law enforcement proviso" inMillbrook v. United States, where a federal prisoner was allowed to bring a claim against the U.S. for intentional torts committed by federal prison guards in the scope of their employment.[3] Under the FTCA, a tort claim against the U.S. must be presented in writing to the appropriate federal agency within two years after the claim accrues, or it is time-barred. 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b).
Plaintiffs are also limited to a timeline for filing. Plaintiffs must file an initial administrative claim with the government agency in question within two years of the incident. Once the agency mails a response, the plaintiff then has six months to file the suit in federal court.[4]
TheSupreme Court of the United States has limited the application of the FTCA in cases involving the military. This is theFeres doctrine.[5]
FTCA is the "exclusive means by which a party may sue the United States for money damages ... in tort" (28 USC § 2679. Exclusiveness of remedy). Accordingly, an FTCA action "can be brought only in a United States District Court" (28 USC § 1346(b)). Regarding the timing of filing, FTCA's § 2401(b) states that the action must be brought "within two years after the claim accrues," or "within six months after ... notice of final denial of the claim by the agency".
In January 2025, the Supreme Court grantedcertiorari in the caseMartin v. United States, which seeks to address whether the discretionary function exception can prevent claims from arising under the law enforcement proviso. A decision on the case is expected in June or July 2025.[6] In June 2025, the Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision that the law enforcement proviso does not override the discretionary function exception, allowing the Martin case to proceed.[7]
The"Federal Tort Claims Act" was also previously the official short title passed by the Seventy-ninth Congress on August 2, 1946, as Title IV of theLegislative Reorganization Act, 60 Stat. 842, which was classified principally to chapter 20 (§§ 921, 922, 931–934, 941–946) offormer Title 28,Judicial Code and Judiciary.
Title IV of theLegislative Reorganization Act of August 2, 1946 was substantially repealed and reenacted as sections 1346 (b) and 2671et seq. of Title 28 on June 25, 1948 (Tort Claims Procedure).[8][9]
The Act was passed following the 1945B-25 Empire State Building crash, where a bomber piloted in thickfog by Lieutenant Colonel William F. Smith, Jr. crashed into the north side of theEmpire State Building. AsNPR reported, "Eight months after the crash, the U.S. government offered money to families of the victims. Some accepted, but others initiated a lawsuit that resulted in landmark legislation. The Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946, for the first time, gave United States citizens the right to sue the federal government."[10] Although the crash was not the initial catalyst for the bill, which had been pending in Congress for more than two decades, the statute was made retroactive to 1945 in order to allow victims of that crash to seek recovery.[11]
The FTCA was amended by theFederal Employees Liability Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 1988, also known as the Westfall Act, following the Supreme Court decision inWestfall v. Erwin in which the Court had found a federal employee liable for negligence in their duties. The 1988 act amended the FTCA to make federal employees immune to tort lawsuits resulting from cases of negligence or omission in their duties, instead making the U.S. government the defending party under the FTCA, allowing the litigant to seek damages for non-constitutional violations.
In 2020, a protester inPortland, Oregon, was hit in the forehead with an impact munition fired by a U.S. marshal during theGeorge Floyd protests. The protester filed a federal suit for excessive force, but it was dismissed by U.S. District Court JudgeMichael Mosman, who stated that the protester could still seek damages under the FTCA.[12]
In 2022, a navy sailor successfully sued under the act after being hit by a vehicle driven by an active-duty military member, and received a $493,000 settlement.[13]
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
