Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

866 F.2d 314

Docket No. 87-2541.

O'Neal v. Eu

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted Dec. 27, 1988.* Decided Jan. 31, 1989.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1989-01-31

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“A plaintiff must plead more than a merely negligent act by a federal official in order to state a colorable claim under Bivens.”

quoted by 5 later decisions, including Standlee v. United States, Kelly v. Christy

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Daniels v. Williams · Schweiker v. Chilicky

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1989-01-31

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2003

5 federal appellate ·

50198919902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Louis Butler O'Neal, Represa, Cal., pro se.

No appearance for defendants-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California.

Before FERGUSON, NORRIS and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Louis Butler O'Neal, a California state prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's order dismissing his constitutional tort action brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971). O'Neal contends that Roy Bailey, a Veterans Administration official, negligently failed to obtain records which would have established that O'Neal had a right to Veteran's death pension benefits. O'Neal also contends that he is entitled to the benefits.

¶2

A plaintiff must plead more than a merely negligent act by a federal official in order to state a colorable claim under Bivens. See Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 330-31, 106 S.Ct. 662, 664-65, 88 L.Ed.2d 662 (1986) (plaintiff must plead more than mere negligence in a 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 action); Tallman v. Reagan, 846 F.2d 494, 495 (8th Cir.1988) (extending Daniels to a Bivens -type action involving gross negligence), Nichols v. Block, 656 F.Supp. 1436, 1442 (D.Mont.1987) ("Daniels is applicable by analogy to a Bivens action against federal officials"); Artis v. Petrovsky, 638 F.Supp. 51, 54 (W.D.Mo.1986) (applying Daniels in a Bivens -type action); see also Schweiker v. Chilicky, --- U.S. ----, 108 S.Ct. 2460, 2480, 101 L.Ed.2d 370 (1988) (Brennan, J. dissenting) ("in order to prevail in any Bivens action, [a plaintiff] must ... prove a deliberate abuse of governmental power rather than mere negligence"). Because O'Neal only alleges negligence, and the pleaded facts indicate that Bailey could not have been more than negligent, the district court properly dismissed O'Neal's complaint.

¶3

The judgment is AFFIRMED.

*

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a) and Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4

/866/f2d/314 · .json · Public domain