Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ford v. United States

United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Eastern Division

April 2, 2015

WESLEY FORD Reg. # XXXXX-XXX, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

JOE J. VOLPE, Magistrate Judge.

INSTRUCTIONS

The following recommended disposition has been sent to United States District Judge J. Leon Holmes. Any party may serve and file written objections to this recommendation. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection. If the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the evidence that supports your objection. An original and one copy of your objections must be received in the office of the United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of the findings and recommendations. The copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact.

If you are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit new, different, or additional evidence, and to have a hearing for this purpose before either the District Judge or Magistrate Judge, you must, at the time you file your written objections, include the following:

1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is inadequate.

2. Why the evidence to be proffered at the new hearing (if such a hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing before the Magistrate Judge.

3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at the new hearing in the form of an offer of proof, and a copy, or the original, of any documentary or other non-testimonial evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing.

From this submission, the District Judge will determine the necessity for an additional evidentiary hearing. Mail your objections and "Statement of Necessity" to:

DISPOSITION

I. INTRODUCTION

Wesley Ford ("Plaintiff") is an inmate of the Forrest City Federal Corrections Institution. He filed this pro se action pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), claiming that the United States of America failed to provide for his various medical and hygienic needs. (Doc. No. 2.) After careful review of the Complaint, the Court concludes that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action and recommends that Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed without prejudice.

II. ANALYSIS

Prior to bringing a claim under the FTCA in federal court, a petitioner must comply with 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a).[1] Compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a) is established by certain procedural requirements arising under 28 C.F.R. § 14.1. et seq. Lunsford v. United States, 570 F.2d 221, 225 (8th Cir. 1977). Of particular relevance to this action is 28 C.F.R. § 14.2(a), which provides:

For purposes of the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 2401(b), 2672, and 2675, a claim shall be deemed to have been presented when a Federal agency receives from a claimant, his duly authorized agent or legal representative, an executed Standard Form 95 or other written notification of an incident, accompanied by a claim for money damages in a sum certain for injury to or loss of property, personal injury, or death alleged to have occurred by reason of the incident; and the title or legal capacity of the person signing, and is accompanied by evidence ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.