Court Opinion

ID: 9448816
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 23:45:23.375135+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:31:33.598926
License: Public Domain

BURGER, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
I concur in affirming the judgment of the District Court but I do so on jurisdictional grounds. As I see it the United States has not consented to suit for the proceeds of insurance policies under the Federal Employees’ Liability Insurance Act. Absent consent neither this court nor the District Court has jurisdiction. The majority concludes that “the United States has consented to be sued * * * to the extent that any such civil action or claim can be shown to involve some right created by this Act and a breach by the Government of some duty with *660respect thereto.” (Emphasis added.) Assuming, arguendo, that consent to suit can be so qualified, the fact is that the majority finds that the Government has not failed “in the performance of any duty arising under the Act,” and hence the conclusion must be that no consent to suit has been given, and jurisdiction is therefore lacking. Appellant’s remedy, whatever it may be, is not by way of a suit against the United States.