Search for: ""Feres v. United States" OR "340 U.S. 135"" Results 1 - 16 of 16
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
10 Sep 2010, 2:32 pm by Dwight Sullivan
United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950); Chappell v. [read post]
26 Jun 2019, 2:18 am by Salvi, Schostok & Pritchard P.C.
United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), that the United States is not liable for injuries that members of the armed forces suffer on active duty. [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 6:34 am by John Elwood
United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950). [read post]
7 Oct 2007, 2:44 pm
United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), the Supreme Court articulated a specific immunity doctrine for soldiers suing the government for such injuries).The question with regard to contractors, however, is whether these governmental immunities extend to them also. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 12:40 pm by John Elwood
United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), barring suits by members of the military for injuries that arise out of, or are in the course of activity incident to, military service; Witt asks the Court to overrule Feres; the cases are discussed here. [read post]
17 May 2011, 12:39 pm by John Elwood
United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), barring suits by members of the military for injuries that arise out of, or are in the course of activity incident to, military service. [read post]
10 Aug 2020, 2:24 am by Schachtman
In addition to the temporal disconnect, the majority gave virtually no consideration to the three-way relationship between the product supplier defendants, the plaintiffs, and the plaintiffs’ employer, the United States government. [read post]