Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Moffett v CSC 457 F.supp.2d 571

Moffett v CSC 457 F.supp.2d 571

Ratings: (0)|Views: 55|Likes:
Published by Thalia Sanders
flood and hurricane issue
flood and hurricane issue

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Thalia Sanders on Nov 28, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

11/28/2011

pdf

text

original

 
Westlaw Delivery Summary Report for PATRON ACCESS,-
Date/Time of Request: Monday, November 28, 2011 11:09 EasternClient Identifier: PATRON ACCESSDatabase: FSFINDCitation Text: 457 F.Supp.2d 571Lines: 1219Documents: 1Images: 0
Civil. Hurricane insurance Moffett v. CSC
The material accompanying this summary is subject to copyright. Usage is governed by contract with Thomson Reuters,West and their affiliates.
 
United States District Court,D. Maryland.Thomas L. MOFFETT, II, et al., Plaintiffs,v.COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION, et al.,Defendants.Civil No. PJM # 05-1547.Sept. 29, 2006.
Background:
Maryland residents, who were in-sureds and family or household members of in-sureds under the National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP) whose homes suffered damaged as a resultof flooding during Hurricane Isabel, sued variousinsurance companies, the Federal Emergency Man-agement Agency (FEMA) and a number of its em-ployees, private contractors who assisted FEMA inthe administration of the NFIP, and insurance ad- justers for violations of their due process rights,fraud in both the procurement of NFIP policies andthe adjustment of claims under those policies, tor-tious interference with contract, and breach of con-tract. Defendants filed motions to dismiss.
Holdings:
The District Court,Messitte, J., held that:(1)
Bivens
remedy was inappropriate for federal of-ficials' alleged violations of insureds constitutionalrights;(2)common law actions related to handling of claims under standard flood insurance policies(SFIP), including fraud, were preempted by federallaw; and(3)claims of fraud in the procurement of NFIPpolicies were barred by reason of conflict preemp-tion.Motions granted.West Headnotes
[1]United States 393 50.1
393United States393IGovernment in General393k50Liabilities of Officers or Agents for Negligence or Misconduct393k50.1k. In General.Most Cited Cases A
 Bivens
action” is a judicially created dam-ages remedy designed to vindicate violations of constitutional rights by a federal official.
[2]United States 393 50.1
393United States393IGovernment in General393k50Liabilities of Officers or Agents for Negligence or Misconduct393k50.1k. In General.Most Cited Cases
United States 393 50.3
393United States393IGovernment in General393k50Liabilities of Officers or Agents for Negligence or Misconduct393k50.3k. Existence and Exclusivity of Other Remedies.Most Cited CasesA
Bivens
remedy is available only where (1)Congress has not already provided an exclusivestatutory remedy; (2) there are no special factorscounseling hesitation in the absence of affirmativeaction by Congress; and (3) there is no explicit con-gressional declaration that money damages not beawarded.
[3]United States 393 50.3
393United States393IGovernment in General393k50Liabilities of Officers or Agents for Negligence or Misconduct393k50.3k. Existence and Exclusivity of Other Remedies.Most Cited CasesWhere the design of a government programsuggests that Congress has provided what it con-siders adequate remedial mechanisms for constitu-tional violations that may occur in the course of itsPage 1457 F.Supp.2d 571
(Cite as: 457 F.Supp.2d 571)
© 2011 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.
 
administration, a
Bivens
remedy is generally notavailable.
[4]United States 393 50.10(1)
393United States393IGovernment in General393k50Liabilities of Officers or Agents for Negligence or Misconduct393k50.10Particular Acts or Claims393k50.10(1)k. In General.Most Cited CasesBecause Congress had already provided a com-prehensive remedy for aggrieved National Flood In-surance Program (NFIP) insureds,
Bivens
remedywas inappropriate for federal officials' alleged viol-ations of insureds constitutional rights in connec-tion with insureds' claims arising from damagessuffered as a result of flooding during HurricaneIsabel. National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, §1302 et seq.,42 U.S.C.A. § 4001 et seq.
[5]States 360 18.3
360States360IPolitical Status and Relations360I(B)Federal Supremacy; Preemption 360k18.3k. Preemption in General.MostCited CasesState law is preempted under the SupremacyClause in three circumstances: (1) when Congresshas clearly expressed an intention to do so (expresspreemption); (2) when Congress has clearly inten-ded, by legislating comprehensively, to occupy anentire field of regulation (field preemption); and (3)when a state law conflicts with federal law (conflictpreemption).U.S.C.A. Const. Art. 6, cl. 2.
[6]States 360 18.5
360States360IPolitical Status and Relations360I(B)Federal Supremacy; Preemption 360k18.5k. Conflicting or ConformingLaws or Regulations.Most Cited CasesConflict preemption comes in two forms: (1) adirect conflict between state and federal law, suchthat compliance with both is impossible, and (2)where a state law stands as an obstacle to the ac-complishment and execution of the full purposesand objectives of Congress.U.S.C.A. Const. Art. 6,cl. 2.
[7]Insurance 217 1110
217Insurance217IIIWhat Law Governs217III(B)Preemption; Application of State or Federal Law217k1102Particular Laws or Activities217k1110k.Federal Insurance Pro- grams.Most Cited Cases
States 360 18.41
360States360IPolitical Status and Relations360I(B)Federal Supremacy; Preemption 360k18.41k. Insurance.Most Cited CasesCommon law actions related to handling of claims under standard flood insurance policies(SFIP), including fraud, were preempted by federallaw under theories of express and conflict preemp-tion; allowing such claims would interfere with theobjectives of the National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP).U.S.C.A. Const. Art. 6, cl. 2;44 C.F.R. Part 61, App. A(1), Art. 9.
[8]States 360 18.9
360States360IPolitical Status and Relations360I(B)Federal Supremacy; Preemption 360k18.9k. Federal Administrative Regu-lations.Most Cited CasesFederal regulations have no less pre-emptiveeffect than federal statutes.U.S.C.A. Const. Art. 6,cl. 2.
[9]Insurance 217 1110
217Insurance217IIIWhat Law GovernsPage 2457 F.Supp.2d 571
(Cite as: 457 F.Supp.2d 571)
© 2011 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->