Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

17 F.R.D. 210

Ferran v. United States

Puerto Rico District Court

Decided March 31, 1955

Puerto Rico District Court · decided 1955-03-31

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2671

Relies on Arnstein v. Porter · Doehler Metal Furniture Co. v. United States · Arenas v. United States

Decided 1955-03-31

RUIZ-NAZARIO, District Judge.

¶1The affidavit of the United States Attorney in support of the motion herein fails to comply with the requirements of Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., and, therefore, the Court cannot give any weight to the contents thereof in considering defendant’s request for a summary judgment.

¶2As the allegations of the amended complaint are so meagre in the exposition of many informative facts which, if properly alleged, would have permitted the court to determine whether or not this action falls within the exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C.A. § 2671 et seq., invoked by the defendant in its motion for summary judgment, the Court is unable to hold, in the absence of further facts presenting a clearer picture of the situation that defendant is entitled to a summary judgment as a matter of law.

¶3“A litigant has a right to a trial where there is the slightest doubt as to the facts.” Doehler Metal Furniture Co. v. United States, 2 Cir., 149 F.2d 130, 135, 136; Arenas v. United States, 322 U.S. 419, 434, 64 S.Ct. 109088 L.Ed. 1363; Arnstein v. Porter, 2 Cir., 154 F.2d 464, 470, 471; Sarnoff v. Ciaglia, 3 Cir., 165 F.2d 167, 168. Cited *211with approval in Peckham v. Ronrico Corporation, 1 Cir., 171 F.2d 653, 657.

¶4That being the rule in this jurisdiction, defendant’s motion for summary judgment must be, as it is hereby, denied.

¶5It is so ordered.

/17/frd/210 · .json · Public domain