Hensley v. United States
Filed July 9, 2008
Cite as 06-35619

Ignorance does not stay Statute of Limitation under FTCA

While driving on the grounds of U.S. Naval base, Pamela Hensley (Hensley) was struck from behind by a car driven by Naval Ensign Edward Eich (Eich). When the accident happened, Eich was in uniform and aboard his personal vehicle.

Due to the seriousness of Hensley’s injury, she was taken to a Navy hospital to receive treatment. While hospitalized, Hensley was given a form, which contained Eich’s name and address, along with information about United Services Automobile Association (USAA), his personal insurance carrier. She was advised to follow up with USAA.

When Hensley and her husband attempted to negotiate with USAA, they were unsuccessful. Consequently, they filed a suit.

The federal government substituted itself for Eich. Subsequently, it moved to dismiss the Hensleys’ complaint as untimely under the two-year statute of limitations under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).

The district court denied the motion to dismiss by holding that the Hensleys’ tort action was timely. It found that an FTCA claim does not accrue for limitations purposes until the plaintiff knows or should know that the alleged tortfeasor was acting within the scope of federal employment.

Following a bench trial, the district court also found that Eich had operated his car negligently. Therefore, the district court ruled in favor of Hensley and granted an award of more than $1.5 million.

On appeal, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the foregoing decision by holding that the district court erred in ruling that the Hensley’s lawsuit was timely.

The appeal court made the following findings:

• a cause of action under the FTCA accrues when the plaintiff knows “both the fact of injury and its immediate physical cause”


• For purposes of measuring Federal Tort Claims Act's two-year statute of limitations, plaintiffs' claim accrued at time of collision and not later when Attorney General certified that driver of other vehicle was acting within scope of his federal employment at time of collision.
  

  The plaintiff’s ignorance of the involvement of government employees is immaterial to accrual of a federal tort claim. Accrual does not wait until the plaintiff is aware that the alleged tortfeasor is a federal employee.

• plaintiffs were not entitled to equitable tolling of statute where they failed to exercise due diligence to investigate defendant's status at time of accident, and government did not engage in any fraudulent concealment, misconduct, or trickery.

The Hensleys were required to exercise due diligence to investigate Eich’s status at the time of the accident.

Hensley knew she was on a military base and saw Eich’s Naval uniform at the time of the accident. Military police responded to the accident and Hensley was transported to a military hospital.

All of these facts must have put the Hensleys on notice that they should investigate whether Eich was acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the accident.