WO 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

 

Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Present Evidence and Claim Damages in 

Excess of Amount Demanded in Administrative Claim (the “Motion”). (Doc. 29) One of 

the Plaintiffs (the “Victim”), who is a minor, was injured in a collision with a Unites States 

Postal Service (“USPS”) vehicle. (Doc. 29 at 2) The 10-year-old Victim’s pelvis was 

fractured, and he suffered other injuries to his groin area and genitals. (Doc. 29 at 3) The 

Plaintiffs filed a claim against USPS for $250,000 as compensation for their injuries, and 

USPS denied the claim arguing that its employee was not at fault for the collision. (Doc. 

29 at 5) The Plaintiffs initiated this case as the result of USPS’s refusal to pay their claim 

for damages. 

The Plaintiffs filed the Motion seeking permission to increase the amount of 

damages sought in this lawsuit. (Doc. 29 at 6) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2675, once a plaintiff 

files a claim against a federal agency, the plaintiff cannot file a lawsuit “for any sum in 

excess of the amount of the claim presented to the federal agency, except where the 

increased amount is based upon newly discovered evidence not reasonably discoverable at 

Chenique Scott, et al., 

 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

United States of America, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

No. CV-18-00796-PHX-SPL 

ORDER 

 
2 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

the time of presenting the claim to the federal agency, or upon allegation and proof of 

intervening facts, relating to the amount of the claim.” 28 U.S.C. § 2675(b). 

The Plaintiffs allege that the now 12-year-old Victim has reached puberty and is 

starting to experience additional injuries as a result of the collision, including erectile 

dysfunction and incontinence issues. (Doc. 29 at 5) The Plaintiffs assert that the Victim’s 

damages exceed $250,000 because the Victim “may live the rest of his life without the 

benefit of a fully functioning sex organ,” and this development is based on newly 

discovered evidence not reasonably discoverable at the time that their administrative claim 

was filed. 

In response, Defendant United States of America (the “Government”) argues that 

the Motion should be denied without prejudice until discovery has closed. Specifically, 

the Government argues that the Plaintiffs cannot satisfy their burden of demonstrating that 

the Victim’s new injuries were not discoverable at the time of the filing of the 

administrative claim because there is not enough information in the record to make this 

determination. (Doc. 36 at 4) The Court agrees and finds that there is not enough 

information in the record for the Court to decide that the Victim’s newly reported injuries 

were not discoverable at the time the administrative claim was filed. Therefore, the Court 

will dismiss the Motion without prejudice and require the parties to take discovery on the 

specific issue of whether the Victim’s newly reported injuries, those related to puberty, 

erectile dysfunction, and incontinence, were reasonably discoverable at the time the 

Plaintiffs’ administrative claim was filed. The Court will allow the parties to file a motion 

and brief the issue of whether the Plaintiffs satisfy any exception to 28 U.S.C. § 2675(b) at 

the close of discovery. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Present Evidence and Claim Damages 

in Excess of Amount Demanded in Administrative Claim is denied without prejudice; 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall take discovery on the specific 

issue of whether the Victim’s injuries related to puberty, erectile dysfunction, and 
3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

incontinence, were reasonably discoverable at the time the Plaintiffs’ administrative claim 

was filed; and 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiffs may renew their motion and the 

parties may provide further briefing on these issues at the close of discovery. 

 Dated this 23rd day of May, 2019. 

Honorable Steven P. Logan 

United States District Judge