Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Marie C. Romulus and Pierrot Romulus v. United States
Citations: 160 F.3d 131; 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 28443; 1998 WL 787097Docket: 97-6117
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; November 12, 1998; Federal Appellate Court
Marie C. Romulus and Pierrot Romulus appeal the dismissal of their Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) claims against the United States, originally ruled by the Eastern District of New York for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Romuluses filed claims after a USPS truck rear-ended Ms. Romulus's vehicle in August 1994, but their claims were denied due to insufficient information provided in response to USPS's requests for medical reports and wage loss statements. The district court, while acknowledging that the plaintiffs were not obligated to submit additional documentation under regulations governing tort claims, determined that they failed to meet the presentment requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a). The court specified that a valid claim must include a written notice that allows the agency to investigate and a claim for a sum certain in damages. The court found the SF 95 forms submitted by the Romuluses inadequate for these purposes, leading to a ruling that they had not exhausted their administrative remedies, which precluded federal jurisdiction. On appeal, the plaintiffs reiterate their position that filing the SF 95 forms fulfilled the presentment requirement, arguing that the information provided was sufficient for USPS to investigate their claims. They contend that the denial of their claims indicated exhaustion of administrative remedies, allowing them to pursue their case in federal court under the FTCA. The appellate court reviews the district court's dismissal de novo. The appeal is addressed through a per curiam opinion due to unsettled law in the Circuit. The judgment is affirmed largely based on the district court's comprehensive reasoning, excluding the consideration of the applicability of regulations under 28 U.S.C. § 2672 to the presentment requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a), as this issue was not raised on appeal. In this Circuit, a Notice of Claim filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) must contain sufficient information for the agency to investigate and assess the claim's value, as established in Keene Corp. v. United States and Johnson v. United States. It is determined that simply filing a Standard Form 95 (SF 95) does not meet the presentment requirement; claimants must provide detailed information rather than conclusory statements. In this case, the plaintiffs did not supply adequate information for the United States Postal Service (USPS) to investigate their claims. Consequently, the district court's judgment is upheld.