Day v. Massachusetts Air National Guard

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a court “is entitled to something more than conclu-sory abstractions” in a complaint and that plaintiff failed to “justify [a hearing] under ordinary summary judgment standards, which are a good analogy in this instance”
• explaining that the United States consents to be sued for damages under the FTCA “provided that in the same circumstances a private employer would be liable for the acts of his employee under the local law”
• noting the Supreme Court’s emphasis on the doctrine’s purpose of avoiding undue judicial interference in military discipline and “grievance matters”
• stating that application of summary judgment standards is appropriate
• “immunity-related limitations on Bivens are presumptively to be applied to claims under section 1983”
• ʺPossibly Feres . . . deserves reexamination by the Supreme Court.ʺ

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).