340 U.S. 135 (1950) (U.S. Supreme Court)
Feres v. United States is the cornerstone case defining the limits of the federal government's tort liability to members of the armed forces.
Does the Federal Tort Claims Act allow servicemembers (or their estates) to recover from the United States for injuries or deaths caused by government negligence when the injuries arise out of or in the course of activity incident to military service?
Under the Feres doctrine, the United States is not liable under the FTCA for injuries to servicemembers where the injuries arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to military service. The relationship between the government and members of the armed forces is "distinctively federal," there is no true private-person analogue, uniform federal interests would be undermined by applying varying state tort standards, and Congress provided an alternative, comprehensive compensation system for service-connected injuries. Accordingly, claims by servicemembers for service-related injuries are barred, even outside combat and even when framed as medical malpractice.
No. The FTCA does not authorize suits by servicemembers for injuries that arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to military service. All three consolidated claims were not maintainable under the FTCA.
Feres established a sweeping, judge-made limitation on the FTCA known as the Feres doctrine. It bars most tort suits by active-duty servicemembers for service-related injuries, including peacetime medical malpractice and on-base accidents, based on concerns about federal uniformity, lack of a private analogue, alternative benefits, and military discipline. The doctrine has been extended to bar claims even when the alleged negligence is by civilians if the injury is incident to service (United States v. Johnson), and to preclude derivative indemnity claims (Stencel Aero). It also influenced constitutional tort jurisprudence by counseling against Bivens remedies for service-related injuries (United States v. Stanley). Exceptions exist at the margins (e.g., Brooks for injuries not incident to service; United States v. Brown allowing post-discharge negligence at a VA facility), and Congress has created a limited administrative remedy for active-duty medical malpractice at military facilities (10 U.S.C. § 2733a), but Feres remains the controlling framework for FTCA claims involving servicemembers.