From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fraser v. U.S.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
May 13, 1996
83 F.3d 591 (2d Cir. 1996)

Opinion

No. 1495, Docket No. 93-6334.

Argued May 13, 1994.

Decided May 13, 1996. Certified Question Answered April 16, 1996.

Michael P. Koskoff, Bridgeport, Conn. (Mark C. Durkin, Koskoff, Koskoff Bieder, Bridgeport, Conn., on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant.

Nancy L. Griffin, Asst. U.S. Atty., New Haven, Conn. (Christopher F. Droney, U.S. Atty., New Haven, Conn., on the brief), for defendant-appellee.

William B. Wynne, Middletown, Conn., submitted a brief for amicus curiae Connecticut Legal Rights Project, Inc.).

Appeal from the November 16, 1993, judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Warren W. Eginton, Judge) dismissing a suit against the United States, brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Affirmed.

Before: NEWMAN, Chief Judge, JACOBS and LEVAL, Circuit Judges.


On this appeal from a judgment of the District Court for the District of Connecticut (Warren W. Eginton, Judge), dismissing a suit against the United States, brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. §(s) 1346(b), 2671-2680 (1994), we certified two questions of Connecticut law to the Connecticut Supreme Court ("the Court"). See Fraser v. United States, 30 F.3d 18 (2d Cir. 1994). After some delay occasioned by the Court's request for a certification of a statement of the relevant factual circumstances and the parties' efforts to agree on an appropriate response to the Court's request, the matter was ultimately argued before the Court on December 5, 1995, and a decision was released on April 16, 1996.

After slightly reformulating the two questions we certified into one question — "In the circumstances of this case, does a psychotherapist have a duty to control a patient being treated on an outpatient basis in order to prevent harm to third persons?" — the Court answered the question in the negative. Fraser v. United States, 236 Conn. 625, 627 n.3 (1996). Since Connecticut law governs the substantive issues of liability in this FTCA suit, the Court's authoritative ruling on Connecticut law defeats the plaintiff's claim that the United States is liable for the death of plaintiff's decedent because employees of the West Haven Veteran's Administration Medical Center breached a duty of control alleged to be owed to the plaintiff's decedent.

Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.


Summaries of

Fraser v. U.S.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
May 13, 1996
83 F.3d 591 (2d Cir. 1996)
Case details for

Fraser v. U.S.

Case Details

Full title:AGNES FRASER, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF HECTOR FRASER…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

Date published: May 13, 1996

Citations

83 F.3d 591 (2d Cir. 1996)

Citing Cases

Valentin v. St. Francis H.M. Ct.

Therefore, the court finds that the defendant owed the plaintiff a common-law duty in this case. For example,…

Rogers v. Seventeen Pillsbury Hill

Our Supreme Court has stated, "Existing Connecticut precedents impose only a limited duty to take action to…