Estate of Vinberg v. United States

TORT LAW
United States District Court, District of Alaska (2022)

Elza Bouhassira


In Estate of Vinberg v. United States, 2022 WL 11753090 (D. Alaska 2022), the district court
held that a widow’s claim regarding her husband’s death was not barred by the intentional tort
exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). (Id. at 6). Through his widow, a diseased
civilian’s estate sued the United States, the U.S. Navy, and the Naval officer who shot the
civilian. (Id. at 1). The Naval officer was a watchman on duty when the civilian entered a fenced
off area, knocked on a door, began to leave, returned when the door was opened, and then was
shot and killed by the Naval officer. (Id.). The civilian’s widow sued under the FTCA, asserting
a wrongful death claim and a negligence claim. (Id. at 2). The FTCA gives federal district courts
exclusive jurisdiction over certain claims against the United States, seeking to remove the
sovereign immunity of the United States in tort cases. (Id. at 3). The United States argued that
the widow’s claim was barred by the intentional tort exception to the FTCA because her claims
were actually assault and battery claims. (Id. at 4). The court rejected this argument, reasoning
that the widow’s amended complaint never alleged that the Naval officer acted intentionally or
assaulted her husband. (Id. at 6). The court further stated that if the United States had presented
more evidence of what happened leading up to the shooting, the court might have been able to
conclude that the widow’s claim was for assault and battery. (Id.). But, with the limited evidence
before the court, it could not conclude that the widow’s amended complaint was for assault and
battery. (Id.). Rejecting the United States’ argument, the district court held that a widow’s claim
regarding her husband’s death was not barred by the intentional tort exception to the FTCA and
that the United States did not establish the applicability of the intentional tort exception. (Id.).

Estate of Vinberg v. United States

TORT LAW
United States District Court, District of Alaska (2022)

Elza Bouhassira


In Estate of Vinberg v. United States, 2022 WL 11753090 (D. Alaska 2022), the district court
held that a widow’s claim regarding her husband’s death was not barred by the intentional tort
exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). (Id. at 6). Through his widow, a diseased
civilian’s estate sued the United States, the U.S. Navy, and the Naval officer who shot the
civilian. (Id. at 1). The Naval officer was a watchman on duty when the civilian entered a fenced
off area, knocked on a door, began to leave, returned when the door was opened, and then was
shot and killed by the Naval officer. (Id.). The civilian’s widow sued under the FTCA, asserting
a wrongful death claim and a negligence claim. (Id. at 2). The FTCA gives federal district courts
exclusive jurisdiction over certain claims against the United States, seeking to remove the
sovereign immunity of the United States in tort cases. (Id. at 3). The United States argued that
the widow’s claim was barred by the intentional tort exception to the FTCA because her claims
were actually assault and battery claims. (Id. at 4). The court rejected this argument, reasoning
that the widow’s amended complaint never alleged that the Naval officer acted intentionally or
assaulted her husband. (Id. at 6). The court further stated that if the United States had presented
more evidence of what happened leading up to the shooting, the court might have been able to
conclude that the widow’s claim was for assault and battery. (Id.). But, with the limited evidence
before the court, it could not conclude that the widow’s amended complaint was for assault and
battery. (Id.). Rejecting the United States’ argument, the district court held that a widow’s claim
regarding her husband’s death was not barred by the intentional tort exception to the FTCA and
that the United States did not establish the applicability of the intentional tort exception. (Id.).