Independent Contractor Exception Did Not Bar FTCA Suit

A district court incorrectly held the independent-contractor exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act barred a tort claim, because the plaintiffs sought to hold the government liable for the conduct of its employees and therefore the exception did not apply, according to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The plaintiffs' suit under the FTCA alleged the government was responsible for the death of a subcontractor employee who was killed when highly pressurized air ejected him from a manhole where he was performing maintenance work on an aircraft support system. The plaintiffs averred the government failed to provide proper safety training for workers and that government employees acted negligently in failing to warn the workers it was unsafe to enter a manhole while the system was pressurized. The district court determined the independent-contractor exception to the FTCA barred the plaintiffs' suit because the deceased worker was a contractor employee, and the government did not have sufficient control over the project or the contractor to convert the worker's status into that of a de facto government employee.

However, the Fifth Circuit concluded the status of the deceased worker's employer was irrelevant because applicability of the independent-contractor exception depends on whether the tortfeasor was an employee of the government or an independent contractor. Also, the plaintiffs were not seeking to hold the government vicariously liable for the acts of its contractors but instead sought to hold the government directly liable for the death because federal employees allegedly failed to adequately warn, train, and supervise the deceased worker and abate dangerous conditions on federal property. The mere fact independent contractors might also have caused the death did not implicate the independent-contractor exception. The appellate court nevertheless affirmed the lower court's summary dismissal of the FTCA claims on the basis the government did not have control over the aspect of the project that gave rise to the worker's death. (Linn, et al. v. U.S., CA-5, 52 CCF ¶78,952)

(The news featured above is a selection from the news covered in the Government Contracts Report Letter, which is published weekly and distributed to subscribers of the Government Contracts Reporter. )