John Michael Borneman v. United States of America, John Michael Borneman 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.

• explaining that district courts “must apply the law of the state in which the alleged tort occurred to ascertain whether the federal employee was acting within the scope of his employment”
• reversing the district court’s decision to reject the government’s scope-of-employment certification as premature but noting that the court could weigh the plaintiff’s affidavit in determining whether he had satisfied his burden of proof
• “[Section] 1447(d) prohibits review of district courts’ determinations of whether jurisdictional statutes have been satisfied, not review of determinations where district courts exceed their jurisdictional authority”
• once removed, federal court cannot remand case to state court even after holding that certification was erroneous

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).