Court Opinion

ID: 9469273
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 02:36:13.785387+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:41:18.430419
License: Public Domain

THOMAS A. CLARK, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I join in Judge Fay’s concurrence. However, I would decide the “discretionary function” issue after trial as a matter of determining liability, not jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b) provides jurisdiction in Federal Tort Claims Act cases. If the governmental function is a discretionary one, there is no liability due to the language of the Act. Judge Tjoflat’s discussion in his dissent is very learned and helpful. However, I would first want to know how Whisenhant, an established homicidal psychotic, happened to be given the opportunity to be in Mobile in 1975 and 1976 when he killed and mutilated the three women. I do not see how one decides whether the circumstances leading to his release constituted a “discretionary function” without a factual judicial inquiry. Such a judgment call should not be based merely on what is in a complaint.