Robert Juan Dartez, LLC v. United States
824 F. Supp. 2d 743
N.D. Tex.2011Background
- FTCA action against United States arising from SEC actions regarding Stanford Ponzi scheme; receivership administers claims and potential third-party litigation; Plaintiffs seek about $18.7 million for lost principal and lost interest under three claims (intentional tort, negligent supervision, negligence); Plaintiffs allege misconduct by SEC official Spencer Barasch and supervisory failures; SEC’s discretionary regulatory actions allegedly include delaying investigations and mismanagement; Government moves to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(1) arguing FTCA discretionary function exception bars suit; court agrees that the claims fall within the discretionary function exception and grants dismissal without prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether FTCA discretionary function exception bars the claims | Dartez argues SEC inaction and mismanagement caused damages | United States contends action falls within discretionary regulatory decisions | Yes; claims barred by discretionary function exception |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Gaubert, 499 U.S. 315 (1991) (discretionary function governs when action involves policy judgment)
- Varig Airlines v. United States, 467 U.S. 797 (1984) (regulatory decisions involve balancing objectives and resources)
- Berkovitz ex rel. Berkovitz v. United States, 486 U.S. 531 (1988) (mandatory directives may defeat discretionary exception)
- Dalehite v. United States, 346 U.S. 15 (1953) (two-prong test for discretion and policy judgments)
- Muniz v. United States, 374 U.S. 150 (1963) (illustrates limits of judicial review of agency discretion)