James C. Conrad 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 where a criminal procedural rule provided that the government “must take the defendant without unnecessary delay” before a judge, the “exercise of judgment” was required in determining “how much delay is necessary”
• finding district court lacked jurisdiction to hear a false imprisonment 16 claim pursuant to the discretionary function exception of the FTCA
• Under California law, “[t]he plaintiff can rebut the presumption ... by demonstrating that the indictment was procured on the basis of false testimony.”
• in an FTCA action, the law of the state in which the alleged tort occurred applies
• FTCA actions are governed by the substantive law of the state in which the alleged tort occurred
• FTCA actions are governed by the substantive law of the state in which the alleged tort occurred

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).