Hajdusek v. United States
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
895 F.3d 146 (2018)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Joseph Hajdusek (plaintiff) enrolled in the Marine Corps Delayed Entry Program (the DEP), a program in which individuals signed up for the Marine Corps with a delayed start to allow time to physically and mentally prepare for active service. While in the DEP, participants, known as poolees, were required to engage in exercises deemed necessary by their local recruiting stations. After Hajdusek missed a required event, Staff Sargent Mikelo, the manager of Hajdusek’s recruiting station, ordered him to report for physical training. The session was significantly more demanding than previous trainings and resulted in Hajdusek suffering muscle decay leading to permanent disability. Because Hajdusek was not yet on active duty, he was not entitled to military benefits compensating for his injury. Consequently, Hajdusek filed suit against the federal government (defendant), alleging that Mikelo’s conduct during the training session amounted to negligence, entitling him to damages. Hajdusek believed that the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) authorized his suit. The government disagreed, arguing that it was immune from liability because Hajdusek’s claim fell within the FTCA’s exception for discretionary immunity. The district court agreed with the government and dismissed Hajdusek’s suit. Hajdusek appealed to the court of appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kayatta, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.