Filed: May 04, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit May 4, 2015 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSElisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _ L.A. DAVIS; SARAH DAVIS, husband and wife, d/b/a D&D Equipment, Plaintiffs - Appellants, No. 14-2142 v. (D.C. No. 2:13-CV-00982-WJ-CG) (D. New Mexico) SECRETARY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, Defendant - Appellee. _ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _ Before GORSUCH, McKAY, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges. _ The district court dismissed this action
Summary: FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit May 4, 2015 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSElisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _ L.A. DAVIS; SARAH DAVIS, husband and wife, d/b/a D&D Equipment, Plaintiffs - Appellants, No. 14-2142 v. (D.C. No. 2:13-CV-00982-WJ-CG) (D. New Mexico) SECRETARY UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, Defendant - Appellee. _ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _ Before GORSUCH, McKAY, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges. _ The district court dismissed this action ..
More
FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
May 4, 2015
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSElisabeth A. Shumaker
Clerk of Court
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
_________________________________
L.A. DAVIS; SARAH DAVIS, husband
and wife, d/b/a D&D Equipment,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
No. 14-2142
v. (D.C. No. 2:13-CV-00982-WJ-CG)
(D. New Mexico)
SECRETARY UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE,
Defendant - Appellee.
_________________________________
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
_________________________________
Before GORSUCH, McKAY, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges.
_________________________________
The district court dismissed this action under the Federal Tort Claims Act,
holding in part that the FTCA's time limits are jurisdictional and not subject to
equitable tolling. During the pendency of this appeal, the Supreme Court has held in
United States v. Wong, Nos. 13-1074, 13-1075,
2015 WL 1808750 (U.S. Apr. 22,
2015), that the FTCA's time limits are nonjurisdictional and subject to equitable
*
The Court has determined that oral argument would not materially aid our
consideration of the appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)(C); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G).
Thus, we have decided the appeal based on the briefs. Our order and judgment does
not constitute binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res
judicata, and collateral estoppel.
tolling. In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Wong, the parties agree that this
case should be remanded to the district court for further proceedings. We agree. The
action is remanded to the district court for further proceedings in light of the Supreme
Court's decision in Wong.
Entered for the Court
Robert E. Bacharach
Circuit Judge
2