Donahue v. United States
634 F.3d 615
| 1st Cir. | 2011Background
- FTCA suits alleging FBI leaks to Bulger related to Halloran and Donahue murders; two district court rulings held claims timely.
- Halloran estate filed administrative claim Sept. 25, 2000; Donahue estate filed March 29, 2001; FTCA two-year filing bar applies.
- Salemme hearings (1998) and Morris testimony disclosed FBI-Bulger/Flemmi ties; media coverage followed.
- Court adopts discovery-rule framework to determine accrual; accrual occurs when injury and its cause are known or reasonably knowable.
- Court assumes leak theory for accrual timing but finds accrual no later than Sept. 2, 1998; thus claims filed after two-year limit are time-barred.
- Court remands with judgment in favor of United States; cross-appeal moot; costs borne by all parties.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accrual timing under the FTCA discovery rule | Donahue/Halloran should accrue when government’s role becomes known | Accrual occurred no later than Sept. 2, 1998 based on Morris testimony and publicity | Accrual no later than Sept. 2, 1998; time-barred |
| Impact of multiple causation theories on accrual | Leak theory controls accrual date | Embodding theory could yield earlier accrual | Assuming leak theory controls, claims still time-barred by Sept. 2, 1998 |
| Effect of nearly year-and-a-half delay between events and Salemme revelations | Publicity and information should delay accrual | Delay does not defeat accrual given discovery rule | Widely publicized disclosures trigger accrual; delay does not save claims |
| Equitable tolling for fraudulent concealment | Equitable tolling should apply due to concealment | Due diligence required; no tolling where inquiry was possible | Equitable tolling rejected; no tolling here |
| Equitable treatment of Halloran/Donahue as separate from Wheelers/JMcIntyre lines | Donahue/Halloran distinct due to official guilt belief | All Bulger-related FTCA claims governed by same accrual rule | Treat Halloran/Donahue as tied for accrual purposes; result remains time-barred |
Key Cases Cited
- Rakes v. United States, 442 F.3d 7 (1st Cir. 2006) (FTCA accrual and discovery-rule considerations)
- Callahan v. United States, 426 F.3d 444 (1st Cir. 2005) (FTCA accrual and discovery-rule principles)
- McIntyre v. United States, 367 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2004) (Latent-injury accrual and discovery-rule analysis)
- Cascone v. United States, 370 F.3d 95 (1st Cir. 2004) (Reasonable-belief/explanation standard for accrual)
- Skwira v. United States, 344 F.3d 64 (1st Cir. 2003) (Accrual determined by reasonableness of knowledge and post-discovery timing)
- Patterson v. United States, 451 F.3d 268 (1st Cir. 2006) (Publicity and knowledge can trigger accrual; timeliness after notice)
- United States v. Kubrick, 444 U.S. 111 (U.S. 1979) (Discovery rule framework for accrual in FTCA contexts)
- John R. Sand & Gravel Co. v. United States, 552 U.S. 130 (U.S. 2008) (General accrual timing principles in FTCA context)