U.S. Sup. Ct.;
15-109
This case began with two suits filed by respondent Walter Himmelreich, a federal prisoner. He first filed suit against the United States, alleging that a severe beating he received from a fellow inmate was the result of negligence by prison officials. The Government treated the suit as a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), which allows plaintiffs to seek damages from the United States for certain torts committed by federal employees, 28 U. S. C. §1346(b), “[s]ubject to the provisions of chapter 171” of Title 28. But an “Exceptions” section of the FTCA dictates that “the provisions of [Chapter 171] and section 1346(b) of this title … shall not apply” to certain categories of claims. The Government moved to dismiss the action on the ground that the claim fell into the exception for “[a]ny claim based upon … the exercise or performance … [of] a discretionary function,” namely, deciding where to house inmates, §2680(a). While the motion was pending, Himmelreich filed a second suit: a constitutional tort suit against individual Bureau of Prison employees, again alleging that his beating was the result of prison officials’ negligence. Ordinarily, the FTCA would have no bearing on that claim. But after the dismissal of Himmelreich’s first suit, the individual employee defendants argued that Himmelreich’s second suit was foreclosed by the FTCA’s judgment bar provision, according to which a judgment in an FTCA suit forecloses any future suit against individual employees. Agreeing, the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the individual prison employees. The Sixth Circuit reversed, however, holding that the judgment bar provision did not apply to Himmelreich’s suit.
