Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google
Scholar
on the Web
Google Web
Search
MSN Web
Search
Yahoo! Web
Search
in the News
Google News
Search
Google News
Archive Search
Yahoo!
News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com
Search
Google Blog
Search
Technorati Blog
Search
in other Databases
Google Book
Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Patsy Andreotti, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. United States of America, Defendant and Respondent
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. - 469 F.2d 95
Sept. 22, 1972
Thomas R. Davis, of Di Giorgio, Davis, Hastin & Klein, Bakersfield, Cal., for plaintiff and appellant.
D. Dwayne Keyes, U. S. Atty., L. Patrick Gray, III, Ass't U. S. Atty., Fresno, Cal., Walter H. Fleischer, Raymond D. Battocchi, Washington, D. C., for defendant and respondent.
Before CHAMBERS, MERRILL and TRASK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The judgment in favor of the United States in this Federal Tort Claims case is affirmed.
The finding that the injury to the plaintiff was caused by the negligence of an independent contractor performing services (unsupervised as to details) for the government is not clearly erroneous. Actually, the finding, on the record, seems inescapable.
Under California law (and the injury occurred in a California post office) the negligence might be imputed to the landowner. But in our view, the permission to sue the United States granted by the Tort Claims Act does not go far enough to cover imputed negligence. United States v. Trubow, 214 F.2d 192 (9 Cir. 1955); United States v. Dooley, 231 F.2d 423 (9 Cir. 1955).