Legal Document

502 U.S. 301 112 S.Ct. 711 116 L.Ed.2d 731 Shirley M. MOLZOF, Personal Representative of the Estate Robert E. Molzof, Petitionerv.UNITED STATES. No. 90-838. Argued Nov. 4, 1991. Decided Jan. 14, 1992. Syllabus The District Court awarded guardian ad litem petitioner Molzof's since-deceased husband damages under Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA or Act) for supplemental medical care injuries suffered by Mr. Molzof as a result negligence federal employees, but refused to award future expenses and loss enjoyment life. Appeals affirmed, ruling that latter two types were barred FTCA's prohibition on "punitive damages," 28 U.S.C. § 2674. Held: 1. Section 2674—under which "[t]he United States shall be liable [on] tort claims, in same manner extent private individual like circumstances, not . punitive damages" (emphasis added)—bars recovery only what are legally considered traditional common-law principles; i.e., those whose recoverability depends upon proof defendant has engaged intentional egregious misconduct purpose is punish. Pp. 304-312. (a) This reading consistent with above-quoted language 2674, makes clear FTCA liability generally determined reference state law, legal term art widely accepted meaning, Congress was presumably aware when it adopted Act. In contrast, Government's view must defined "that excess of, bear no relation to, compensation" contrary statutory language, suggests plaintiff may entitled some reason above beyond ordinary notions compensation, "in individual." 304-308. (b) here also Act's structure provides courts workable standard determining improperly seeking damages." argument congressional intent define contrasting them "actual compensatory demonstrated 2674's second clause—which limits governmental permitting wrongful-death actions damages, measured pecuniary resulting from death"—is unpersuasive, since undermined both well-established meaning concession "pecuniary injuries" does apply non-wrongful-death suits. Moreover, interpretation would difficult impractical apply, creating enormous problems actual particular kinds cases. Furthermore, fact this relied common law interpreting 2680's exceptions persuasive evidence should do here, many exceptions—e.g., 2680(a)'s exception claims based performance "discretionary function"—simply have antecedent, while others serve qualitatively different than bar having been designed protect disruption certain important functions—e.g., handling mail 2680(b). 308-312. (c) erred deciding Mrs. recovering her husband's his It undisputed solely simple theory. Thus, sought because they fall within term. P. 312. 2. However, case remanded lower resolve first instance whether recoverable Wisconsin, State occurred. 911 F.2d 18 (CA7 1990), reversed remanded. THOMAS, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. Daniel A. Rottier, Madison, Wis., petitioner. Christopher J. Wright, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice THOMAS 1 requires us determine scope awards cases brought against Act, §§ 2671-2680. 2 * Petitioner personal representative estate late husband. On October 31, 1986, veteran, underwent lung surgery at Veterans' Administration hospital Wisconsin. After surgery, he placed ventilator. For undisclosed reason, ventilator tube providing oxygen him became disconnected. ventilator's alarm system As combination events, deprived approximately eight minutes before predicament discovered. Because unfortunate series triggered employees' conceded negligence, irreversible brain damage, leaving permanently comatose. 3 filed suit care, expenses, Respondent (the Government) admitted liability, proceeded bench trial issue damages. free being provided veterans' reasonable adequate, satisfied services had intention transferring hospital, best interests remain neighboring hospitals could provide comparable level care. addition ordering continue court physical therapy, respiratory weekly doctor's visits—not hospital. 4 refused, however, duplicate already Similarly, declined died after final judgment entered, substituted capacity estate. 5 Seventh Circuit affirmed Court's judgment. (1990). agreed that, given provision apparent satisfaction any effect therefore Id., 21. With respect claim life, stated Wisconsin unclear question comatose recover such Ibid. decided, "even if recognized Act," ibid., "an life can way recompense, reimburse otherwise redress patient's uncognizable loss. ." 22. We granted certiorari consider used FTCA. 499 ----, 111 1305, 113 239 (1991). II 6 Prior 1946, sovereign immunity prevented injured negligent acts employees obtaining through lawsuits; compensation passage bill Congress. See Dalehite v. States, 346 15, 24-25, 73 956, 962, 97 L.Ed. 1427 (1953). replaced "notoriously clumsy," id., 25, S.Ct., limited waiver States' immunity. Orleans, 425 807, 813, 96 1971, 1975, 48 390 (1976). case, we relates States. pertinent part follows: 7 "The liable, respecting provisions title relating interest prior 2674 added). 8 clear, conjunction jurisdictional grant over 1346(b), law. Muniz, 374 150, 153, 83 1850, 1852, 10 805 (1963); Richards 369 1, 6-7, 11, 82 585, 589-590, 591, 492 (1962); Rayonier, Inc. 352 315, 318-319, 77 374, 376-377, 354 (1957); Indian Towing Co. 350 61, 64-65, 68-69, 76 122, 124-125, 126-127, 100 (1955); Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 338 366, 370, 70 207, 210, 94 171 (1949). 9 Nevertheless, statute, definition question. Cf. Reconstruction Finance Corp. Beaver County, 328 204, 208, 66 992, 994, 90 1172 (1946) (definition "real property" statute question). argues "§ interpreted so permit state-law intended act sustained tort, preclude punishment conduct." Brief 8; see 12. understand suggesting plaintiffs cannot characterized "punitive" standard. Government, other hand, "damages compensation." 5. view, there strict dichotomy between damages; strictly necessarily statute. Government contends plaintiff's loss—which narrowly construes exclude excessive, duplicative, an inherently noncompensable loss, 22—are effect. agree petitioner's conclude language. prohibits "damage effect." "Punitive meaning; "[p]unitive long law." Silkwood Kerr-McGee Corp., 464 238, 255, 104 615, 625, 78 443 (1984). Although precise nature use evolved time, size frequency increased, decisions make concept pedigree "It principle trespass all torts, jury inflict called exemplary, punitive, vindictive defendant, enormity offense rather measure plaintiff." Day Woodworth, 13 How. 363, 371, 14 181 (1852). Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Haslip, 1032, 1042, 1; (1991) ---- - 1047-1048 (SCALIA, concurring judgment). 11 Legal dictionaries existence drafted enacted indicate commonly understood punish defendants torts committed fraud, malice, violence, oppression. See, e.g., Black's Law Dictionary 501 (3d ed. 1933); Cyclopedic 292 1940). more one occasion, confirmed general understanding. "By definition, degree defendant's culpability." Massachusetts Bonding 128, 133, 186, 189, 189 (1956); Browning-Ferris Industries Kelco Disposal, Inc., 257, 274, n. 20, 278, 24, 109 2909, 2920, 2922, 106 219 (1989); Milwaukee St. Paul R. Arms, 91 489, 493, 23 (1876); supra, How., 181. focuses conduct. rule, recognizes compensate kind 12 A cardinal rule construction holds that: "[W]here borrows terms accumulated tradition centuries practice, knows adopts cluster ideas attached each borrowed word body learning taken its will convey judicial mind unless instructed. absence direction definitions, departure them." Morissette 342 246, 263, 72 240, 250, 288 (1952). NLRB Amax Coal 453 322, 329, 101 2789, 2794, 69 672 (1981); Braxton 500 n., 1854, 1859, 114 385 carries force "Certainly warrant assuming unaware established definitions spending 'some twenty-eight years drafting redrafting, amendment counter-amendment.' " Neustadt, 366 696, 707, 81 1294, 1301, 614 (1961) (quoting Spelar, 217, 219-220, 10, (1949)). 15 appears premised assumption "shall But clause interpreting, say that. What clearly states difference important. These "gray" zone subsequently reduced appeal, mistakenly simply matter excessive erroneous compensation. Excessiveness principles affect amount, nature, recovered. embodies element conduct proved awarded. 16 construe pari materia added just year enacted. "If, wherein death caused, place where omission complained occurred provides, construed provide, persons respectively, benefit action brought, lieu thereof." 17 address Alabama Massachusetts, permitted actions. U.S., 130-131, ,S.Ct., 187-188. "confirms demonstrates 'punitive damages' 'actual damages.' 18-19 (footnote omitted). undermined, own statement although defines "the death," 19, 13. Given concession, correct read proving much claims. apply. Under reading, made amount saved rent, meals, clothing, daily living did incur hospitalized. Otherwise, these duplicative making pay twice. difficulties inherent attempting prove offsets enormous. That acknowledge practical implications theory evidenced representations oral matter, willing accept purposes FTCA, Tr. Oral Arg. 28, "there very few circumstances" authorized challenge punitive. 38. 19 create liquidated contexts compensated fixed levels correspond At argument, disclaimed extension theory, 35, instead asserted position "reasonable" approximation 36. surely prohibit departs case. restrictive involve business 20 Finally, reject reliance interpretations various contained 2680, depart concepts, supportive notion adopt Many 2680 obvious antecedent. example, 2680(a) exercise failure perform discretionary function duty agency employee Government." 2680(a). little sense try incorporate standards explicating function" concepts basis most shared meaning. marked deeply rooted 21 An examination further limitations functions prerogatives disruption. They mark boundary Congress' willingness impose desire activities exposure individuals." Varig Airlines, 467 797, 808, 2755, 2762, 660 Through exceptions, "Congress steps seriously handicap efficient government operations." 163, 1858, (1963). Gaubert, 1267, 1273-1274, 335 (1991); Berkovitz 486 531, 536-537, 108 1954, 1958-1959, 531 (1988). involving mishandling mail, 2680(b), assessment collection taxes customs duties, 2680(c), imposition establishment quarantine, 2680(f), caused fiscal operations Treasury regulation monetary system, 2680(i), combatant military, 2680(j), Tennessee Valley Authority Panama Canal Company, 2680(l ), (m), land banks, 2680(n). examples suggest primary concern enumerating retain might disrupted lawsuits. then, 22 bars principles. Our reverse Appeals' decision liability. seeks their depend remand, evaluate Sheridan 487 392, 401, 6, 2449, 2455, true recognize setoff paid (or pay) incurred plaintiff, reason. questions resolved courts. III reversed, proceedings opinion. 24 ordered.

Classification Label: 7