Cohen v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
151 F.3d 1338 (1998)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
William Cohen (plaintiff) was incarcerated in a minimum-security federal prison for 18 months for copyright violations. While Cohen was watching television in a common area, another prisoner changed the channel. Cohen protested and changed the channel back. Later that evening, the other prisoner repeatedly beat Cohen with a metal chair. As a result, Cohen suffered lifelong neurological and pain issues. Cohen sued the federal government (defendant) under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), arguing that the other prisoner’s criminal history meant he should have been placed in a higher-security facility. Cohen alleged that a federal prison employee had failed to follow the prison’s own rules when the employee filled out the attacking prisoner’s security-designation form and that this negligence had led to the other prisoner’s misclassification and placement in the same facility as Cohen. The federal government argued that the FTCA’s discretionary-function exception prohibited the lawsuit entirely and that it had not been negligent. The district court held a bench trial. The district court found that the FTCA’s discretionary-function exception did not apply and that the employee had negligently failed to fill out the security-designation form in accordance with the prison’s own rules. The district court entered judgment for Cohen. The federal government appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Carnes, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.


