Theodore Knudsen 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 to “determine whether an individual is an employee or contractor” under the FTCA the “crucial question is the amount of control exercised by the government over the physical performance of the individual”
• courts must “evaluate the extent to which the government has the power to supervise the individual’s day-to-day operations”
• Courts must “evaluate the extent to which the government has the power to supervise the individual’s day-to-day operations.” (citing Orleans, 425 U.S. at 814)
• “[W]e are unconvinced that Congress intended to transform independent contractors into employees merely because it expected the VA to insure that quality work was done with government funds.”
• “factual statements in a party’s pleadings are generally binding”
• “A party is bound by what it states in its pleading . . . Although the rule smacks of legalism, judicial efficiency demands that a party not be allowed to controvert what it has already unequivocally told a court by the most formal and considered means possible.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).