Feres Doctrine

The law bars many claims by members of the armed forces.

Many people assume that every time someone is injured or killed as a result of negligence that there must be a lawsuit or at least a claim. That is often times not the case. In a situation where members of the armed services are injured due to the negligence of other members of the armed services, the law does not permit such claims.

Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries to members of the armed forces sustained while on active duty and not on furlough and resulting from the negligence of others in the armed forces. The opinion is an extension of the Englishcommon-law concept of sovereign immunity.

The practical effect is that the Feres doctrine effectively bars service members from successfully collecting damages for personal injuries, whether or not they were suffered in the performance of their duties. It also bars families of service members from filing wrongful death or loss of consortium actions when a service member is killed or injured.

The bar does not extend to killed or injured family members, so a spouse or child may still sue the United States for tort claims, nor does it bar service members from filing either in loco parentis on their child's behalf or filing for wrongful death or loss of consortium as a companion claim to a spouse or child's suit.

Also, if the injuries or deaths are the result of product defect, there may be an opportunity to obtain compensation for the victims and their families by suing the sellers and manufacturers of the defective product.

If you have any questions you can reach me at johnl@oqlaw.com

John R. Leach III