The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Granted: Monday, March 7, 2005
Argument: Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Decision: Tuesday, November 8, 2005
Issues: Economic Activity, Nongovernmental Liability

Advocates

Thomas G. Cotter (argued the cause for Respondents)
Deanne E. Maynard (argued the cause for Petitioner)

Facts of the Case

Injured workers sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), alleging that federal mine inspectors' negligence helped cause a mine accident. The FTCA authorized private tort actions against the U.S. when the federal government, if a private person in similar circumstances, would be liable according to the law of the place where the incident occurred. The district court dismissed the suit, holding that the allegations failed to show Arizona law would have imposed liability on a private person in like circumstances. The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding federal mine inspections were a governmental function with no private analogue. In such cases, the Ninth Circuit held, the FTCA waived sovereign immunity if a state or municipal entity would be held liable under the law where the activity occurred.

Question

Did the Federal Tort Claims Act waive the United States' sovereign immunity in cases where local law would make a state or municipal entity liable?

Conclusion

No. In a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice Stephen Breyer, the Court held that the United States waived sovereign immunity only where local law would make a "private person" liable in tort, not where local law would make a "state or municipal entity" liable. Nothing in the FTCA's "context, history, or objectives" supported the Ninth Circuit's holding that the act waived sovereign immunity where the United States, if a state or municipal entity, would be liable. Moreover, the Ninth Circuit treated the act's requirement that there be "like circumstances" to require the "same circumstances." Private analogies did, in fact, exist for the federal mine inspectors' conduct.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 9 votes for United States, 0 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Federal Tort Claims, or Alien Tort Statute
Voted with the majority
Roberts
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Wrote the majority opinion
Breyer
Full Opinion by Justice Stephen G. Breyer

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, United States v. Olson, 546 U.S. ___ (2005),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2005/2005_04_759/>
(last visited ).