Federal Tort Claims Act
Federal Tort Claims
The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) (P.L. 79-601, 60 Stat. 842) was enacted by U.S. Congress in August 1946, according to which any individual can sue the federal government for personal damages, like loss of money and property, physical injury or any other such situation caused by federal organization and its employees, while working within the limits of employment. The person can file claims against the government and the expenditure must be repaid to him if falls under the liabilities of FTCA. The FTCA is authorized for the recovery of any financial damage caused by some misunderstanding or mistreatment of the rules and regulations set by federal government, since the act falls under negligence and intolerable behavior which can highly cost the other person. According to this act, "The United States shall be liable, respecting the provisions of this title relating to tort claims, in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances, but shall not be liable for interest prior to judgment or for punitive damages" (Cohen and Burrows 2007). This statement clearly indicates what can the state government do in such tort claims cases and what does not fall under its provisions. Hence according to FTCA, the government will not provide compensation in those tort claims which accounts under the discipline and law and comes as a penalty to the person according to a particular situation.
Prior to the enactment of FTCA, there were many such claims in which individuals, who were physically injured or financially broken by any individual or corporation, were provided compensation according to the law. But there was no such law against the federal government and its employees by which it becomes liable of the negligence and mis-use of authority given by the government. Cases like negligence or mal-treatment by health care professionals of federal government, or accidents caused by the drivers of the state's public transport system were never suited, as federal government did not consider itself liable to be claimed for such incidents. Such happenings were treated as personal faults...
Federal Tort Claims Act Traditionally, the federal government was immune from lawsuits by its citizens under a doctrine known as sovereign immunity. Theoretically, this immunity was justified because people would necessarily have disagreements with the government and resorting to the court system to help resolve those disputes could have resulted in a tremendous waste of time and energy. However, the situation left people with no solution when they were harmed by
Tort Law and Trident Diving Company An item that has been recently recalled by the CPSC is the line of High-Pressure Scuba Diving Air Hoses manufactured by Trident Diving Equipment. In this instance, the item has the propensity to cause drowning in those who use it even when properly installed. Trident has received one report of the hose leaking. No injuries have been reported due to the use of this product,
Some legislators believe that such suits encourage companies to ensure that there products are safe. Other law makers, however, believe that such suits are excessive and can prevent companies from being able to recover. Another form of tort reform that as been suggested is known as "loser pays. This type of legislation is based on the English Rule (Protecting Firestone and Ford Federal Tort Reform). This particular proposal would force
Week 5 2. First, the Parkers were contractually obligated to pay the late fees because the fees were not exorbitant and were part of the parties' lease contract. However, unless the lease contract specifically says that the late fees could be charged as additional rent, then the landlord could not consider the late fees additional rent. If the late fees cannot be considered additional rent, then the Parker's failure to pay
Employee Privacy Torts Issues relating to employee privacy have been at the forefront of businesses for many years. This has been fuelled by the dynamic workplace which changes constantly and also by employees and employers being more litigation-conscious. Technology has also spurred on employee privacy issues with e-mail and the internet being related to heightened concerns about vulnerability of employers to litigation. Many employers have thus exacerbated their concerns relating to
Employee Privacy Torts History of Employee Privacy Changing Trends of Employee Privacy Impact of Innovative Technology on Employee Privacy Role of Social Media towards Employee Privacy Impact of Changing Community/Society on Employee Privacy Adaptation to the new Environment pertaining to Employee Privacy Employee Monitoring and Surveillance Laws and Employer Policies for Text Messaging and Social Media Electronic Communication Privacy Act Monitoring of Employee Conversations over Telephone & Email Recommendations for creating Effective Policies Future Implications of Employee Privacy As years have passed and
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now