# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 7- 35 61

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Mi ch ael Dani el Cro y le , by an d t hr ou gh San dr a G. Cro y le , as h is pa ren t an d l eg al gu ard ia n; San dr a Cro y le

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll an ts

v.

Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l

Defe nd an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Sep te m

be r 27 , 20 18 Fi le d: Nov em

be r 9, 2 01 8

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN, BENTO N, and SHEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __ BENTON, Circu it Ju dg e.

M i c ha el Dan ie l Cro y le
, by hi s pa ren t an d le ga l gu ard ia n San dr a G. Cro y le
,
su ed un de r th e F e d e r a l Tort Cl ai m s Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 26 71 –8 0, fo r ne gl ig en t

su pe rv is io n an d fai lu re to warn of Mar k N. Mat so n’s se xu al pr op en si ti es

. The di st ric tco ur t di sm is se d th e co m pl ai nt b a s e d o n so ve rei gn im m un it y

. Hav in g juri sd ic ti on 1

un de r 28 U.S.C. § 1 29 1, t hi s co ur t af fir m s.

I.

Trip le r Arm

y Med ic a l C e n t e r is a la rg e, te rti ary Arm y ho sp it al

. Trip le r’s Dep art m en t of Mi ni st ry an d Pas to ral Care (DMP C ) pr ov id es rel ig io us se rv ic es fo r
pa ti en ts , ho sp it al st aff, m il it ary pe rs on ne l, an d th ei r fam il ie s. In 19 92
, th e Gov ern m en t co nt ract ed wit h th e The at in e Fat he rs , a Cat ho li c rel ig io us or de r, fo r th e

se rv ic es of a pri es t. The Thea ti ne Fat he rs ass ig ne d M at so n t o s erv e at Trip le r.

The Gov ern m en t di d no t do a ba ck gr ou nd ch eck on Mat so n. It rel ie d on an

ecc le sia sti ca l en dor se m en t by the Arch di oc es e of Mi li ta ry Serv ic es

. The en do rs em en t
cert ifi ed th at an in di vi du al “ [i]s a fu ll y qu al ifi ed m em be r of th e cl erg y of a rel ig io us fai th gr ou p rep res en te d by th e c e r ti fy in g Age nc y ” an d m et “ th e req ui rem en ts

es ta bl is he d by th e Mi li ta ry Dep art m en ts fo r ap po in t men t as an of fic er an d a ch ap la in .” To ob ta in th e en do rs em en t, Mat so n su bm it te d in fo rm at io n on hi s cri m in al hi st or y

. Mat so n th en ha d no pr io r co nv ic ti on s an d no pe nd in g ch arg es ag ai ns t hi m

. Mat so n, ho wev er, ha d a hi st or y of se xu al ab us e al le ga ti on s. In 19 87
, Mat so n was

arre st ed fo r fo nd li ng two te en ag e bo y s, an d in 19 89
, he was ch arg ed wit h th e se xu al

as sa ul t o f a ch il d.

Und er hi s co nt ract , Mat so n’s pr im ary du ty was to co nd uc t Mas s se ve ral ti m es

a week

. At th e req ue st of fam il ie s— wit ho ut se ek in g pr io r ap pr ov al fro m th e DMPC —h e co nd uc te d Co nf ra t e r ni ty of Ch ris ti an Doc tri ne cl as se s to he lp pr ep are ch il dr en f o r th ei r fir st Hol y Co m

m un io n. The se were no t req ui red by th e co nt ract

. As a ch il d, Mi ch ael Cro y le at te nd ed Mas s at Trip le r. He al le ge s th at Mat so n se xu al ly

as sa ul te d h im

si x d iff eren t t im es whi le esc or ti ng hi m to CCD cl as se s af

te r Mas s.

The Hon or ab le Henr y

Edward Aut rey, Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t J ud ge for th e 1 East ern Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.

-2

-Cro y le
, by hi s pa ren t an d le ga l gu ard ia n, su ed th e Uni te d St at es fo r ne gl ig en ce

an d ne gl ig en t su pe rv is io n. He al le ge s th e Gov ern m en t kn ew or sh ou ld ha ve kn own ab ou t Mat so n’s hi st or y of se xu al ab us e an d was ne gl ig en t in fai li ng to warn fam il ie s of hi s se xu al pr op en si ti es

. Fu rth er, Cro y le cl ai m s th e Gov ern m en t br each ed it s du ty of care by fai li ng to pr ev en t Mat so n fro m ha vi ng co nt act wit h ch il dr en

. The di st ric t

co ur t fo un d th e Uni te d St at es was en ti tl ed to so ve rei gn im m un it y an d di sm is se d th e

cas e fo r la ck of su bjec t m at te r juri sd ic ti on un de r Fed

. R. Ci v. P. 1 2 ( b ) ( 1 )

. Cro y le

ap pe al s.

In de ci di ng a m ot io n un de r Ru le 12 (b )(1 ), th e di st ric t co ur t m us t di st in gu is h be twee n a faci al at ta ck

—wh ere it lo ok s on ly to th e face o f t h e p l e ad in gs —an d a f a c t ua l at ta ck

—wh ere it m ay co ns id er m at te rs ou ts id e th e pl ead in gs

. Osb o r n v . Unit ed Sta te s , 91 8 F .2d 72 4, 72 9 n.6 (8 th Ci r. 19 90 ). In a fact ua l at ta ck , th e “ no nm ov in g pa rty do es no t ha ve th e be ne fit of 12 (b )(6 ) sa feg ua rd s.” Id

. If th e juri sd ic ti on al is su e is “ bo un d up ” wit h th e m eri ts of th e cas e, th e di st ric t co ur t m ay

“ de ci de whe th er to ev al ua te th e ev id en ce un de r th e su m m ar y ju dg m en t st an da rd .”
Mo ss v. Unit

ed St at es , 89 5 F.3 d 10 91
, 10 97 (8 th Ci r. 20 18 ). Thi s co ur t is bo un d by
th e di st ric t c ou rt’s ch arac te riz at io n of th e Ru le 12 (b )(1 ) m ot io n. Ca rl se n v. Gam eSt op , In c. , 83 3 F.3 d 90 3, 90 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ) (“ The m et ho d in whi ch th e di st ric t

co ur t res ol ve s a Ru le 12 (b )(1 ) mo t i o n

— t h at is
, whe th er th e di st ric t co ur t tre at s th e

m ot io n as a faci al at ta ck or a fact ua l at ta ck —o bl ig es us to fo ll ow th e sa m e
ap pr oa ch .”). The di st ric t co ur t he re st at ed th is was a fact ua l a t t a c k

. “ W e rev ie w a di st ric t co ur t’s de ci si on to di sm is s a co m pl ai nt fo r la ck of su bjec t m at te r juri sd ic ti on de no vo , pl aci ng th e bu rd en of pr ov in g th e ex is te nc e of su bjec t m at te r juri sd ic ti on on th e pl ai nt iff

.” Gre en Acr es Ent

er s., In c. v. Unit

ed St at es , 41 8 F.3 d 85 2, 85 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ).

-3

-II.

So ve rei gn im m

un it y sh ie ld s th e fed eral go v e r n men t fro m su it ab se nt it s

co ns en t. FDI

C v. Mey er , 51 0 U.S. 47 1, 47 5 (1 99 4)

. Th e FTCA waiv es th e Gov ern m en t’s so ve rei gn im m un it y fo r so m e to rt cl ai m s, au th or iz in g pr iv at e su it s fo r

ne gl ig en ce of Gov ern m en t ag en ts

. 28 U.S.C. § 13 46 (b)( 1)

. The waiv er is su bjec t to

e x c e p t i o n s

. Und er 28 U.S.C. § 26 80 (a), th e Gov ern m en t m ay no t be su ed fo r th e

“ ex erci se or pe rfo rm an ce or th e fai lu re to ex erci se or pe rfo rm a di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on

or du ty o n th e pa rt of a fed eral ag en cy or a n e m pl oyee of th e Gov ern m en t, whe th er

or no t th e di sc ret io n in vo lv ed be ab us ed .” If th e Gov ern m en t’s co nd uc t is wit hi n th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on , “ th e fed eral co ur t la ck s su bjec t m at te r juri sd ic ti on .”
Hi ns le y v. St an di ng Ro ck Chi ld Pro te ct iv e Ser vs . , 51 6 F.3 d 66 8, 67 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ).

A two -p art te st go ve rn s th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on

. Se e Ri le y v. Unit ed St at es , 48 6 F.3 d 10 30
, 10 32 (8 th Ci r. 20 07 ), ci ti ng Ber ko vi tz v. Unit ed St at es , 48 6 U.S. 53 1, 53 6 (1 98 8)

. “ Fi rs t, th e co nd uc t at is su e m us t be di sc ret io na ry , in vo lv in g ‘an el em en t of jud gm en t or ch oi ce.’” Ri le y , 48 6 F

. 3 d at 10 32
, qu ot in g B e r ko vi tz , 48 6 U.S. at 53 6. If a fed eral st at ut e, reg ul at io n, or po li cy m an da t e s a
pa rti cu la r act io n, th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on wil l no t ap pl y

. Ber ko vi tz , 48 6 U.S. at 53 6. Seco nd
, th e jud gm en t or ch oi ce m us t be “ th e ki nd th at th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on was de si gn ed to sh ie ld .” Id

. Co ng res s en act ed th e ex cep ti on to

“ pr ev en t jud ic ia l ‘s e c o nd -g ue ss in g’ of le gi sl at iv e an d ad m in is tra ti ve de ci si on s
gr ou nd ed in so ci al
, eco no m ic
, an d po li ti cal po li cy th ro ug h th e m ed iu m of an act io n in to rt.” Unit

ed St at es v. V ar ig Ai rl in es , 46 7 U.S. 79 7, 81 4 (1 98 4)

. If th e jud gm en t is “ su sc ep ti bl e to po li cy an al y si s,” th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on ap pl ie s. Unit ed St at es v. Gau be rt , 49 9 U.S. 31 5, 32 5 (1 99 1) ; Dem er y v. U.S. Dep ’t of
In te ri or , 35 7 F.3 d 83 0, 83 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ). If go ve rn m en t po li cy al lo ws th e ex erci se

o f d i s c r e ti on , t he co ur t wil l “ pr es um e[] t ha t th e ag en t’s act s are gr ou nd ed in po li cy whe n e xe rci si ng th at di sc ret io n.” Dem er y , 35 7 F.3d at 83 3. The pl ai nt iff be ars th e bu rd en of r eb ut ti ng th is pre su m pt io n. Id

.

-4

-As fo r th e fir st req ui rem en t, Cro y le do es no t ch al le ng e th at it is a di sc ret io na ry

de ci si on to ret ai n Mat so n wit ho ut warn in g of hi s se xu al pr op en si ti es

. He do es arg ue th at th e co nd uc t is no t wit hi n th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on be ca us e no

co nc ei va bl e po li cy ch oi ce wou ld al lo w Mat so n acce ss to ch il dr en wit ho ut a warn in g.

The de ci si on whe th er to warn of Mat so n’s se xu al pr op en si ti es or to ta ke ot he r
act io n to res tri ct hi s co nt act wit h ch il dr en is su sc ep ti bl e to po li cy an al y si s. “ [T]he de ci si on to warn is
, at it s co re, a po li cy de ci si on .” Hi ns le y , 51 6 F.3 d at 67 3. Se e al so Met te r v. Unit

ed St at es , 78 5 F.3 d 12 27
, 12 32 –3 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 ); Dem er y , 35 7 F.3 d

at 83 4. Lik ewis e, su pe rv is in g em pl oyees typic al ly in vo lv es po li c y c o n si de rat io ns

. Tone ll i v. Unit ed St at e s , 6 0 F

. 3 d 49 2, 49 6 (8 th Ci r. 19 95 ) (“ Is su es of em pl oyee

su pe rv is io n an d ret en ti on ge ne ral ly in vo lv e th e pe rm is si bl e ex erci se of po l i c y jud gm en t an d fal l wit hi n th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex c e pt io n.” ). Thi s co ur t

reco gn iz es , ho wev er, th at th e “ [f]ail ur e to act aft er no ti ce” of an em pl oyee’s on go in g il le ga l co nd uc t i s n ot “ a ch oi ce b as ed on pl au si bl e p ol ic y co ns id erat io ns .” Id

.

In To ne ll i , th e fact s i n cl ud ed th at th e Gov ern m en t rece iv ed no ti ce of an

em pl oyee’s on go in g il le

ga l co nd uc t, sp eci fy in g th e ti m in g, pa rti es , an d co nt en t of th e

no ti ce. Id

. at 49 4. Here, ho wev er, Cro y le do es n o t a l l e g e th at th e Gov ern m en t

rece iv ed no ti ce o f on go in g i ll eg al co nd uc t du rin g Mat so n’s em pl oym en t at Trip le r. In st ead
, Cro y le al le ge s— up on in fo rm at io n an d be li ef— th at th e Gov ern m en t kn ew or sh ou ld ha ve kn own o f M a t so n’s pr e-em pl oym en t m is co nd uc t. W hi le th e Gov ern m en t’s in act io n aft er no ti ce of on go in g il le ga l co nd uc t is no t su bjec t to po li cy

co ns id erat io ns , th e su pe rv is io n an d ret en ti on of an em pl oyee wit h on ly al le ga ti on s of

pr e-em pl oym en t m is co nd uc t i s s ub ject t o p ol ic y

co ns id erat io ns

. Id

. at 49 6.

In Hin sl ey , Ch i l d P r o t e ct iv e Serv ic es (CPS ) pl aced a m in or wit h a kn own hi st or y of se xu al ly ab u s i n g c h i ld ren in a ho m e wit h th ree y ou ng ch il dr en , wit ho ut

warn in g th ei r m ot he r of hi s pa st ab us e. Hi ns le y , 51 6 F.3 d at 67 0– 71

. Hin sl ey su ed CPS for neg li ge nc e, arg ui ng th at th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on di d no t app ly

-5

-be cau se “ th e st ro ng po li cy in te res t in pr ev en ti ng ch il d ab us e de m an ds th at a warn in g

be gi ve n.” Id

. at 67 3. Thi s co ur t di sa gr eed
, reas on in g th at CPS’s de ci si on “ in vo lv es

an effo rt to ba la nc e th e in te res t in m ai nt ai ni ng th e co nf id en ti al it y of [th e m in or ’s] pa st
act io ns ag ai ns t th e sa fet y co nc ern s th at ari se fro m pl aci ng a kn own se xu al ab us er in

a ho m e f i l l e d w i t h ch il dr en .” Id

. The refo re, th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on
ap pl ie d. Id

.

Lik e Hin sl ey , th e Gov ern m en t he re, in de te rm in in g whe th er to warn fam il ie s

or ta ke ot he r pr ot ect iv e act io n, co ul d ha ve ba la nc ed pu bl ic an d ch il d sa fet y wit h th e

ne ed to pr ot ect Mat so n’s rep ut at io n an d co nf id en ti al it y

. Id

. The Gov ern m en t co ul d ha ve al so ta ke n in to acco un t th at Mat so n’s co nt ract ua l du ti es di d no t req ui re di rect

co nt act wit h ch il dr en

. Oth er po te nt ia l co ns id erat io ns in cl ud e st affi ng sh or ta ge s an d th e rep ut at io n of th e DMPC an d ot he r rel ig io us pe r s o nn el at Trip le r, who co ul d be ha rm ed by as so ci at io n wit h Mat so n. Se e ge ne ra ll y Doe v. Ho ly See
, 55 7 F.3 d 10 66
, 10 85 (9 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (th e de ci si on to ret ai n a pr ie st wit h se xu al -ab us e al le ga ti on s was di sc ret io na ry un de r th e Fed eral So v e r e i g n Im m un it ie s Act be cau se th e Hol y See

co ul d ha ve ba la nc ed th e ch ur ch ’s rep ut at io n, pa st or a l st ab il it y , an d st affi ng sh or ta ge s)
, ci ti ng Jo se

ph v. Offi ce of Co ns ul

at e Gen. of Nig er ia
, 83 0 F.2 d 10 18
, 10 26 (9 th Ci r. 19 87 ) (“ The ex is te nc e of a di sc ret io na r y f u n c ti on un de r th e FSIA is

ge ne ral ly an al y zed un de r th e pr in ci pl es de ve lo pe d pu rs ua nt to th e Fed eral Tort Cl ai m s Act ’s (“ FTCA”) d is cret io na ry fun ct io n e xc ep ti on .”).

Bal an ci ng sa fet y , rep ut at io na l in te res ts , an d co nf id en ti al it y is th e ki nd of de te rm in at i o n “the di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on was de si gn ed to sh ie ld .”
Ber ko vi tz , 48 6 U.S. at 53 6

. Th e Gov ern m en t’s co nd uc t he re is wit hi n th e di sc ret io na ry fu nc ti on ex cep ti on

. Tho ug h th ere m ay be di sa g r eem en ts ho w th es e in te res ts sh ou ld be ba la nc ed , “ th e FTCA d oe s n ot em po wer jud ge s to se co nd gu es s

su ch de ci si on s v ia to rt a ct io n.” Hi ns le y , 51 6 F .3d at 6 73
, ci ti ng Gau be rt , 49 9 U.S.

at 32 3.

-6

-* * * * * * * *

The jud gm en t i s af

fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-7

-