← All Cases Coverage by Bryan K. Randolph · BrynoDC

Hensley (referred to in prior discussion) (2025 Legal Theory, SCOTU)

No. 6:25-cv-06799 District · Teaching/Historical Teaching/Historical
Court
Unclassified
nywd
Judge
Elizabeth A. Wolford 44
Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Judge (CL)
Elizabeth A. Wolford 44
Filed (CL)
Dec 19, 2025
CL Status
active


The Issue

• Whether the Yearsley doctrine immunizes a federal contractor from state tort liability when acting under validly conferred federal authority • Whether the Boyle defense preempts state tort claims against contractors who comply with reasonably precise government specifications • Whether the contractor's actions fell within the scope of federal authorization sufficient to trigger immunity

The Rules

309 U.S. 18 (1940) Yearsley v. W.A. Ross Construction Co.

A contractor acting pursuant to validly conferred federal authority is immune from state tort liability, provided the government validly authorized and directed the work.

487 U.S. 500 (1988) Boyle v. United Technologies Corp.

Federal law displaces state tort law as to government contractors when the government approved reasonably precise specifications, the equipment conformed to those specifications, and the contractor warned the government of known dangers.

28 U.S.C. § 1442 Federal Officer Removal Statute

Any civil action commenced in state court against any person acting under a federal officer may be removed to federal district court.

Unclassified TMR-0f837eb6 May 28, 2026

Cited By (2)

  • This case concerns whether drivers can recover attorney's fees under federal civil rights law after prevailing in the…

  • This case concerns whether drivers can recover attorney's fees under federal civil rights law after prevailing in the…

Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support