Summary judgment on tort claims brought against a defense contractor was denied by the District Court for the Southern District of Texas because the government contractor defense did not bar the claims. The matter involved a contract issued under the Logistics Civil Augmentation Program, which authorized the military to employ civilian contractors to perform selected services during wartime. The plaintiffs in several consolidated cases were fuel truck drivers or their surviving spouses and dependents who alleged fraud, assault and battery, and negligence. According to the plaintiffs, the contractor authorized convoys even though it was aware the trucks would be subject to a high risk of attack. The contractor moved for partial summary judgment based on the government contractor defense, which allows federal law to displace state tort law in narrow, specific circumstances in suits against independent contractors (see Boyle v. United Technologies Corp., 34 CCF ¶75,489). Under the defense, if the government would be immune from suit, that immunity may be passed through to contractors performing the government's tasks. Thus, where a contractor acts within the authority of its contract with the government, it cannot be found liable.