Jack Steele v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the plaintiff’s assertion that “he neither knew, nor in the exercise of reason- able diligence could have known” about the government’s possible liability for his injury was irrelevant to accrual of his FTCA claim
• holding action untimely even though the plaintiff was unaware that an agency of the United States was the party allegedly negligent in failing to warn of condition which resulted in plaintiff’s injuries
• noting unanimity among all courts of appeals except for the First Circuit on this issue
• noting unanimity among all courts of appeals except for the First Circuit on this issue
• where injury is immediate and manifest and close in time with allegedly negligent conduct, claim accrues instantly
• “Congress, by enacting a two-year statute of limitations for tort claims against the government, clearly manifested its intention to have a uniform rule defining when such claims become stale[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).