Opinion
No. C2 02 996
October 8, 2002
ORDER
Ernest Ralph Ellis, Sr., instituted this action against the United States Navy without prepayment of fees or costs. This matter is now before the Court for the initial review of the complaint required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (a), (e).
In his complaint, plaintiff contends that the United States Navy acted in breach of his August 1974 enlistment contract. He also challenges the procedures followed in connection with his 1975 court martial and general discharge from the United States Navy. He seeks compensatory and punitive damages.
This Court is without jurisdiction to entertain plaintiff's claims. InFeres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), the United States Supreme Court held that the United States is not liable for damages claimed by servicemen occurring during the course of their military service. Id., at 146. The Feres doctrine has been broadened to "encompass, at a minimumall injuries suffered by military personnel that are even remotely related to the individual's status as a member of the military, without regard to the location of the event, the status (military or civilian) of the tortfeasor, or any nexus between the injury-producing event and the essential defense/combat purpose of the military activity from which it arose." Major v. United States, 835 F.2d 641, 644-45 (6th Cir. 1987). Thus, the Feres doctrine "effectively bars all claims for injuries taking place while one is on active duty." Fathman v. United States Navy, 723 F. Supp. 1243, 1244 (S.D. Ohio 1989).
This Court is aware of no circumstances under which it may entertain plaintiff's claims for monetary damages. The complaint must therefore be dismissed.
The complaint in this action is hereby DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e).
The Clerk shall mail a copy of the complaint and of this order to plaintiff, as well as to the named defendant and the United States Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio.