U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, 1987

James B. Stanley v. United States of America, and Joseph R. Bertino

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Decided September 17, 1987 · Hatchett, Henderson, Allgood

828 F.2d 1498; 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 13196 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mark W. Pennak, Barbara L. Herwig, Dept, of Justice, Civil Div., Washington, D.C. for Federal defendants-appellants., James Mingle, Asst. Atty. Gen., Baltimore, Md., for State defendants-appellants., Richard A. Kupfer, Cone, Wagner, Nu-gent, Johnson, Hazouri & Roth, P.A., West Palm Beach, Fla., for plaintiff-appellee.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Roy Allen Stewart v. Richard L. Dugger, as Secretary, Department of Corrections, State of Florida (11th Cir. 1988)
Combs v. State (Fla. 1988)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

BY THE COURT:

Upon remand from the Supreme Court of the United States, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 3054, 97 L.Ed.2d 550 (1987), it is

ORDERED:

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida is directed to dismiss with prejudice Stanley’s Bivens claims. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). The district court considered these claims in its order dated October 28, 1983, and certified these claims for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1292(b) on January 31, 1984.

The district court order certified for interlocutory appeal discussed only Stanley’s Bivens claims and not his FTCA or civil rights claims. As a result, the Supreme Court of the United States held that this court lacked jurisdiction of Stanley’s FTCA claims. Accordingly, this order has no effect on the district court’s dismissal of Stanley’s FTCA claims. Similarly, this order has no effect on Stanley’s civil rights claims, which are still pending in the district court.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.