Harris v. Tucker

Filing 4

ORDER granting 2 Motion for substitution and amendment of caption. The Caption of this case is amended to substitute the United States of America as the defendant. Signed by Judge Kristi K. DuBose on 4/2/09. (cmj)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION LARRY HARRIS, Plaintiff, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-0156-KD-C ) ) ) ) ORDER This matter is before the Court on the motion for substitution and amendment of caption (doc. 2). The United States of America moves the court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2679(d)(2), to substitute the United States as the defendant and for amendment of the caption. Plaintiff did not file a response to the motion. As grounds, the United States asserts that the United States Attorney for this district, acting with authority delegated by the Attorney General, has certified that Mark Tucker was acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incident from which plaintiff's claim arose, and therefore, the named defendant should be the United States of America. 28 U.S.C. 2679(d)(2) ("Such action or proceeding shall be deemed to be an action or proceeding brought against the United States . . . and the United States shall be substituted as the party defendant."); see 28 U.S.C. 2679(b)(1) (remedies against the United States provided by 28 U.S.C. 1346(b) and 2672 for acts or omissions of its employees acting within the scope of their employment are "exclusive of any other civil action or proceeding for money damages by reason of the same subject matter against the employee . . .) Accordingly, the motion for substitution is GRANTED and the caption of this case is AMENDED to substitute the United States of America as the defendant. DONE and ORDERED this 2nd day of April, 2009. s / Kristi K DuBose KRISTI K. DuBOSE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?