Carloni v. McDougal
Filing
26
ORDER Granting 4 Motion to Substitute Party. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the caption for this action is hereby modified to reflect the substitution of the United States for Shane McDougal, as the defendant in this matter. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 10/11/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
Case 2:17-cv-01917-JAD-GWF Document 4-2 Filed 07/19/17 Page 2 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
7
ADAM CARLONI,
8
9
10
Plaintiff,
v.
SHANE MCDOUGAL,
11
Defendant.
12
)
) Case No. 2:17-cv-01917-JAD-GWF
)
)
)
)
ORDER
)
)
ECF No. 4
)
)
13
THIS COURT, having been fully apprised that the Acting United States Attorney for the
14
District of Nevada has certified that the individual federal defendant, Sergeant First Class Shane
15
McDougal, was acting within the scope of federal employment or office at the time of the events
16
alleged in the complaint, and the Court having been apprised of the substitution of the United
17
States as defendant for the asserted tort claims by operation of law pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
18
2679(d)(2),
19
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2679(b)(1), (d)(2), Shane
20
McDougal is dismissed from this action on the grounds that the exclusive remedy for tort claims
21
which arise from the negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of federal employees acting within
22
the scope of their office or employment is an action against the United States, and the United
23
States has been substituted for Shane McDougal as the defendant for such tort claims.
24
25
26
27
28
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the caption for this action is hereby modified to
reflect the substitution of the United States for Shane McDougal, as the defendant in this matter.
_____________________________________
_________ _____
_ _ __
____ __
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
ES DISTRICT JU
S DIS
CT
CT
DATED:______________________________
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?