Here is the opinion in Garcia v. United States (D. Ariz.): Garcia v US
The court rejected the government’s motion for summary judgment, on grounds that the Navajo police officer (who struck a killed the plaintiff while driving under the influence) was working in the scope of work of a 638 contract.
Here is the final opinion in Garcia, a Federal Tort Claims Act claim against an Isleta Pueblo tribal cop, who intervened to break up a fight at a wedding (or, in the words of the court, “Two Weddings and a Broken Jaw”): Garcia v. United States.
The court held after a two-day bench trial that the United States could be liable for the actions of an off-duty tribal cop under a 638 contract and the FTCA, but that the cop had not committed a tort.
Here are the opinions in Garcia v. USA and Garcia, out of the District of New Mexico, decided last March. Garcia the tribal cop/defendant allegedy assaulted Garcia the plaintiff at a wedding, and Garcia sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act and the officer individually. The U.S. argued that Garcia had no claim under the Act, and the officer argued that there was no jurisdiction over him.
Turtle Talk 