Michelle Ochran 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 witness did not allege facts which supported violation of a duty under Florida law, a prerequisite to liability under the FTCA
• finding that FTCA claims are governed by the law of the state where the alleged tortious activity occurred
• noting that, in a negligence action, the court would “turn to the law of Florida to determine whether [the defendant] owed a duty of care”
• explaining that “the [FTCA’s] reference to the ‘law of the place’ means law of the State—the source of substantive liability under the FTCA.”
• noting that “unless the facts support liability under state law, the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to decide an FTCA claim.”
• explaining “that unless the facts support liability under state law, the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to decide an FTCA claim”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).