Charles R. JACKSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that an aggravated hand injury resulting from treatment in a military hospital was incident to service, even though the injury occurred while the plaintiff was not on active duty
• “practically any suit that implicates the military judgments and decisions runs the risk of colliding with Feres”
• federal naval enlisted reservist sues United States under FTCA; reference in dicta to reservists and Guard members under the FTCA
• “Members of the National Guard and the Reserves are service members under Feres.”
• “[The plaintiff] received cost-free treatment at the Naval Hospital . . . as a benefit of service in the Naval Reserve and pursuant to [his] military benefits.”
• “A motion to dismiss pursuant to the Feres doctrine, even if raised after the answer to the complaint, should be treated as a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) rather than as a motion for summary judgment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).