Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing plaintiff-deputy marshall’s action under Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), alleging that U.S. Marshall’s directive to plaintiff’s co-workers not to speak with defendant without prior approval during plaintiff’s attempts to gather evidence in support of his defense on charges of witness tampering and use of excessive force in violation of third-party’s civil rights, where Dist Ct. found that said action was precluded under FTCA. Plaintiff accused govt. of malicious prosecution with respect to instant charges that were eventually dismissed. However, Dist. Ct. could properly find that plaintiff’s claim was precluded under discretionary-function exemption of section 2680(a) of FTCA, where: (1) U.S. Marshall’s directive to plaintiff’s co-workers not to speak with defendant entailed element of judgment or choice; and (2) said directive was based on considerations of public policy. Ct. further observed that while plaintiff argued that instant directive violated Constitution, he still could not prevail under FTCA, since FTCA is inapplicable to constitutional torts.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Federal Tort Claims Act