Canuto v. United States
615 F. App'x 951
Fed. Cir.2015Background
- Canuto, a home health care nurse, alleges multiple assaults by US service members in October 2014 in a patient’s home.
- She does not recall specific dates or details of the attacks; symptoms described include bruising and incisions on legs and feet.
- Canuto claims an inhalation agent caused loss of consciousness and mobility during the assaults, but provides no corroborating evidence.
- She did not report the incidents to police or military authorities and did not inform anyone in the military.
- Canuto filed suit in the Court of Federal Claims under the FTCA, asserting monetary damages for acts by federal employees within scope of employment.
- The Claims Court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, citing failure to administratively exhaust FTCA claims before filing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Claims Court has jurisdiction over FTCA claims | Canuto asserts FTCA jurisdiction exists for monetary claims against the US. | The Claims Court lacks Tucker Act jurisdiction for tort claims; district courts handle FTCA actions. | Lacks jurisdiction; FTCA claims must be in district court. |
| Whether Canuto’s § 1983 claim against the United States is cognizable | § 1983 provides a federal damages remedy for violation of constitutional rights. | § 1983 does not authorize suits against the United States for federal official actions. | Dismissed; § 1983 cannot be brought against the United States. |
| Whether FTCA exhaustion is a jurisdictional prerequisite | FTCA exhaustion requirements permit jurisdiction in the appropriate court. | Exhaustion is mandatory; lack thereof bars jurisdiction and transfer is inappropriate. | Court did not abuse discretion in not transferring; no exhaustion shown. |
| Whether the Court should transfer to district court under 28 U.S.C. § 1631 | Transfer could cure jurisdictional defects. | No basis to transfer absent exhaustion; transfer not warranted here. | affirmed dismissal; transfer not compelled. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (Fourth Amendment not money-mandated; outside Claims Court)
- LeBlanc v. United States, 50 F.3d 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (Fourteenth Amendment does not mandate monetary relief; outside Claims Court)
- Rick’s Mushroom Serv., Inc. v. United States, 521 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (abuse of discretion standard for transfer decisions)
- M. Marokapis Carpentry, Inc. v. United States, 609 F.3d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (de novo review standard for jurisdictional dismissal)
- Dist. of Columbia v. Carter, 409 U.S. 418 (U.S. 1973) (§ 1983 applies to state not federal actors; federal officers not under color of state law)
- United States v. City of Jackson, Miss., 318 F.2d 1 (5th Cir. 1963) (Federal government not a 'person' under Civil Rights Act)