INGRAHAM V. UNITED STATES
808 F.2d 1075 (5th Cir. 1987)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an appeal from a damages award. The United States (D),
appealed a judgment, which ruled in favor of Ingraham (Ps), patients, in their suits under
the Federal Tort Claims Act for severe injuries caused by the negligence of government
physicians and denied D's motion to amend the judgment.
FACTS: Several parties sued the Government (D) for negligent treatment by military
physicians. Ingraham (P) sued for severe and permanent damage to his spinal cord from an
operation by an Air Force Surgeon. Bondses (P1) sued for a botched Caesarian section and the
resulting damages to their daughter. P got an award in excess of $1.25 million and P1 got a
judgment in excess of $4 million. D appealed and raised a new issue; a state limitation in
general damages in malpractice awards applied. Both judgments were in excess of the $500,000 ex
delicto statutory cap for Texas. P contend that the statutory limitation is an affirmative
defense under Rule 8(c) which D had not raised at any time during the trial. The failure to
raise a defense constitutes a waiver.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment