T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T D E B O R A H K . R U T L E D G E a nd THOM AS R. RUTL EDGE, P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l ees, v. UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 15198 D C C V N o. 06- 008 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the D i stri ctC ou rtof G uam F r a nc e s T y di ngc o- G a t e w ood, C hi e f D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry 15, 2011

H o n o lu lu , H a w a ii B efo re: T A S H IM A , W . F L E T C H E R , an d B E R Z O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. T he U ni t e d S t a t e s appe a l s f r om the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s j udgm e nta w a r di ng dam ages , af

t era bench tri al , t o p l ai nt i ff s on thei r per sonal i nj ury/m edi ca l m a l pr a c t i c e c l a i m unde rthe F e de r a l T or tC l a i m s A c t( “ F T C A ” ) . W e ha ve 

# FI LED MA R 01 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

ju r is d ic tio n p u r s u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 , a n d w e a f f ir m . G u a m la w g o v e rn s th is F T C A a c t i on. 28 U . S . C . §§ 1346( b) ( 1) , 2674. W e r e v ie w f

o rc le a re rr o rth e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s f a c tu a l f in d in g s , in c lu d in g its f in d in g s o n c a u s a tio n . O bers on v. U . S. D ep’t of A gri c. , 5 1 4 F .3 d 9 8 9 , 1 0 0 0 ( 9 th C i r. 20 08 ). W e a l so re vi ew for c l ea r e rr or the di stri ctcourt ’ s dam ages d e te r m in a tio n . T

re vi no v. U

ni ted Stat es , 80 4 F . 2d 15 12 , 15 14 -15 (9th C i r. 19 86 ). 1. T he di s tr i c tc our tdi d notc l e a r l y e rri n f i ndi ng c a us a t i on. O ne of pl ai nt i ff s’ expert s, D r. S t ee l e, t es t i fi ed thatM rs . R ut l edge w ou l d n othave sust ai ned s e v e r e n e u r o lo g ic a l in

ju ry b u t f

o rth e n e g lig e n c e o f

A irF o r c e m e d ic a l p e r s o n n e l. A l though gove rnm e nte xpe r t s t e s t i f i e d t o the c ontr a ry , i tw a s notc l e a re rr orf orthe d is tr ic t c o u r t to c r e d it D r . S te e le ’s te s tim o n y . See P resc odv. A M R , Inc. , 383 F . 3d 86 1, 86 9 (9th C i r. 20 04 ). T he go vernm ent ’ s a rgum entthatno “ re l i abl e e vi dence” show ed thatM rs . R ut l edge had C auda E qu i na S yndrom e ( “ C E S ”) atthe t i m e of her vi si t s t o the A i r F orce cl i ni c i s s em ant i c. W hether or notshe had C E S or a pre C E S cond i t i on , the evi dence s up po rt ed the di stri ctcourt ’ s ul t i m at e f i nd i ng that M rs . R ut l edge w ou l d n othave sust ai ned h erse vere i nj uri es i f A i r F orce m edi ca l p e r s o n n e l h a d m e t th e ap p lic ab le s ta n d a r d o f c a r e . 2. N ordi d the di s tr i c tc our tc l e a r l ye rri n i t s da m a ge s a w a r d. I n l i ghtof M rs. R u t l ed g e’ s sev ere i n j u ri es, th e aw ard i s n o tso ex cessi v e as t o sh o ck th e sen se3

o f ju s tic e u n d e rG u a m la w . 2 0 G u a m C o d e A n n . § 2 2 8 1 ( “D a m a g e s m u s t, in a ll c a s e s , b e r e a s o n ab le . . . .” ) ; se e Y ako v. U ni ted Stat es , 89 1 F . 2d 73 8, 74 5 (9th C i r. 1 9 8 9 ) ( “T o d e te r m in e w h e th e ra n [ F T C A ] a w a r d is e x c e s s iv e , th is c o u r t lo o k s to th e r e le v a n t s ta te ’s [ o rte rr ito ry ’s ] c a s e la w o n e x c e s s iv e a w a r d s .” ) ; P orterv. T upaz , 1 9 8 4 W L 4 8 8 5 4 , a t * 5 ( D . G u a m A p p . D iv . J u n e 1 2 , 1 9 8 4 ) ( “[ A ]n ap p e lla te courtm ayi nt erpo se i t s j ud gm entas t o the prop eram ou ntof dam ages for per sonal i nj ur i e s onl y w he n i tappe a r s tha tthe r e c ove ry i n the l ow e rc our tw a s s o e xc e s s i ve as t o sho ck the se nse of j ust i ce and rai se a pre sum pt i on thatthe am ou ntaw ar ded w a s a rr i ve d a ta s a r e s ul tof pa s s i on a nd pr e

j udi c e , r a the rtha n upon a f a i ra nd ho nestconsi dera t i on of the fa ct s. ”) . A l though w e m i ghtc om e t o di f f e r e ntc onc l us i on ha d w e be e n s i tt i ng i n the tr ia l c o u r t, w e c a n n o t s a y th a t th e a w a r d s h o c k s th e s e n s e o f ju s tic e . A n d th e r e is no i ndi c a t i on on thi s r e c or d, nordoe s the gove rnm e nta r gue , tha tthe a m ountof the a w a r d w a s in f

lu e n c e d b y p a s s io n o rp r e ju d ic e . AF F I RME D.