decision by parole board to grant or deny parole is discretionary function immune under federal tort claims act
How later courts described this case
- decision by parole board to grant or deny parole is discretionary function immune under federal tort claims act
- “The plaintiff must therefore allege that the Board breached a duty sufficiently separable from the decision-making function to be nondiscretionary and outside of the exception.”
- "It is established in the Fifth Circuit that when the government undertakes to perform services which would not be required in the absence of specific legislation, it will be liable if these activities are performed negligently.”
- distinguishing under discretionary function immunity a negligent decision to release from negligent medical treatment
Written by the judges who cited it.
Distinguished
Distinguished by Clarke v. United States, 107 F. Supp. 3d 238 (2015)
Because Defendant did not undertake to perform any medical services which would not be required in the absence of specific legislation, the analysis in Payton is inapplicable here.
The opinion
KRAVITCH, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur except in Part III. I agree that the allegation of failure to give adequate consideration to records does not state a cause of action. But I would hold that the *494 allegation of failure of the board to acquire and read reports does state a cause of action sufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss.