WOODLEY

v.

CALIFORNIA

Citator

Cited By (14 total)

• Stanley v. Cent. Intelligence Agency, 639 F.2d 1146 (5th Cir. 1981)
  …in Feres was against the United States, the doctrine has been extended to apply to suits against individual defendants. See, e. g., Bailey v. DeQuevedo, 375 F. 2d 72 (3d Cir. 1967); Bailey v. Van Buskirk, 345 F. 2d 298 (9th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 948, 86 S.Ct. 1205, 16 L.Ed.2d 210 (1966). Likewise, although the Feres case involved allegations of negligence, the doctrine has been extended to hold the United States immune to suits based on intentional or reckless as well as constitutional torts.…
• Mollnow v. Carlton, 716 F.2d 627 (9th Cir. 1983)
  …73 L.Ed.2d 1350 (1982), this court applied the Feres doctrine2 to bar the wrongful death claim of a marine pilot's widow who alleged her husband’s death was intentionally caused. In Bailey v. Van Buskirk, 345 F. 2d 298 (9th Cir.1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 948, 86 S.Ct. 1205, 16 L.Ed.2d 210 (1966), we extended the Feres rationale to a serviceman’s direct suit against other servicemen. Accord Mattos v. United States, 412 F. 2d 793 (9th Cir.1969). Thus, Mollnow’s common law tort claims, both negligent and i…
• Hass v. United States, 518 F.2d 1138 (4th Cir. 1975)
  …immunity probably originated as an immunity of superior officers, based upon the necessity of their unfettered exercise of command, cf. Feres, supra, 340 U.S. at 141, 71 S.Ct. 153; Bailey v. Van Buskirk, 345 F. 2d 298 (9th Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 948, 86 S.Ct. 1205, 16 L.Ed.2d 210 (1966), it clearly exists' now between servicemen of any rank. Mattos v. United States, 412 F. 2d 793, 794 (9th Cir. 1969). The only possible ground for not affording such immunity to Russ and Williams would be their…