Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Supreme Court of the United States
Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority
Term: 2018
Important Dates
Argument: January 14, 2019
Decided: April 29, 2019
Outcome
Reversed and remanded
Vote
9-0
Majority
Chief Justice John G. Roberts • Clarence Thomas • Ruth Bader Ginsburg • Stephen Breyer • Samuel Alito • Sonia Sotomayor • Elena Kagan • Neil Gorsuch • Brett Kavanaugh

Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority is a case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on January 14, 2019, during the court's 2018-2019 term. On April 29, 2019, the court reversed and remanded the ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, holding that the Tennessee Valley Authority is "subject to suits challenging any of its commercial activities."[1] Click here for more information. The case came on a writ of certiorari to the 11th Circuit.[2]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The case: On July 30, 2013, Gary Thacker and Anthony Szozda were fishing on the Tennessee River while the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was trying to raise a downed power line from the river. Thacker and Szozda's boat came through the area as TVA was raising the power line, and the two were hit by the conductor. Szozda was killed and Thacker was seriously injured. Thacker and his wife, Venida, sued TVA for negligence. The district court dismissed the complaint. On appeal, the circuit court affirmed.
  • The issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit erred by using a "discretionary-function exception"derived from the Federal Tort Claims Act, from which the Supreme Court generally has declined to borrow rules, instead of the test set forth in Federal Housing Authority v. Burr when testing the immunity of governmental "sue and be sued" entities (like the Tennessee Valley Authority), to immunize the Tennessee Valley Authority from the plaintiffs’ claims.[3]
  • The outcome: The court reversed and remanded the ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, holding that the Tennessee Valley Authority is "subject to suits challenging any of its commercial activities."[1]


    • You can review the lower court's opinion here.[4]

    Timeline

    The following timeline details key events in this case:

    • April 29, 2019: U.S. Supreme Court reversed and remanded the 11th Circuit's ruling
    • January 14, 2019: Oral argument
    • September 27, 2018: U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear case
    • February 26, 2018: Petition filed with U.S. Supreme Court
    • August 22, 2017: The Eleventh Circuit Court

    Background

    On July 30, 2013, Gary Thacker and Anthony Szozda were fishing on the Tennessee River while the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) was trying to raise a downed power line from the river. Thacker and Szozda's boat came through the area as TVA was raising the power line, and the two were hit by the conductor. Szozda was killed and Thacker was seriously injured. Thacker and his wife, Venida, sued TVA for negligence.[5]

    The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and Thacker appealed. He argued that the discretionary-function exception to the government’s sovereign-immunity waiver in the TVA Act did not apply to this case.

    The TVA Act says that the TVA "may sue and be sued in its corporate name." In the case Peoples Nat’l Bank of Huntsville, Ala. v. Meredith, it was found that the TVA is "liable to suit in tort, subject to certain exceptions." The Eleventh Circuit Court ruled, "As relevant here, we have held that TVA cannot be subject to liability when engaged in governmental functions that are discretionary in nature." The court affirmed that the case be dismissed due to the lack of subject matter jurisdiction.[4]

    Questions presented

    The petitioner presented the following questions to the court:[3]

    Questions presented:
    • Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit erred by using a “discretionary-function exception” derived from the Federal Tort Claims Act, from which the Supreme Court generally has declined to borrow rules, instead of the test set forth in Federal Housing Authority v. Burr when testing the immunity of governmental "sue and be sued" entities (like the Tennessee Valley Authority), to immunize the Tennessee Valley Authority from the plaintiffs’ claims.

    Outcome

    On April 29, 2019, the court reversed and remanded the ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. In a unanimous opinion, the court held the Tennessee Valley Authority is "subject to suits challenging any of its commercial activities."[1] Justice Elena Kagan delivered the opinion of the court.

    Opinion

    In her opinion, Justice Kagan wrote:[1]

    “ We reject the view, adopted below and pressed by the Government, that the TVA remains immune from all tort suits arising from its performance of so-called discretionary functions. The TVA’s sue-and-be sued clause is broad and contains no such limit. Under the clause—and consistent with our precedents construing similar ones—the TVA is subject to suits challenging any of its commercial activities. The law thus places the TVA in the same position as a private corporation supplying electricity. But the TVA might have immunity from suits contesting one of its governmental activities, of a kind not typically carried out by private parties. [6] ”

    Text of the opinion

    Read the full opinion here.

    Audio

    Audio of oral argument:[7]

    Transcript

    Read the oral argument transcript here.

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Supreme Court of the United States, Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority, April 30, 2019
    2. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "17-1201 Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority," accessed November 21, 2018
    3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 Supreme Court of the United States, "QPReport 17-1201 Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority," accessed November 21, 2018
    4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 SCOTUSblog, "Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority," accessed November 21, 2018
    5. ↑ Oyez, "Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority," accessed November 21, 2018
    6. ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    7. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, Thacker v. Tennessee Valley Authority, argued January 14, 2019
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Thacker_v._Tennessee_Valley_Authority&oldid=8892351"