DANNY CAESAR V. U S ARMY, No. 16-16505 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 20 2017 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DANNY LEE CAESAR, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 16-16505 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 1:16-cv-00201-LJOBAM v. UNITED STATES ARMY; BOARD OF THE CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS, MEMORANDUM* Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California Lawrence J. O’Neill, Chief Judge, Presiding Submitted March 8, 2017** Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges. Danny Lee Caesar appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims arising from his military service. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Caesar’s federal claims because members of the armed forces may not file suit against the government for injuries incurred during service. See Hodge v. Dalton, 107 F.3d 705, 710 (9th Cir. 1997) (Feres doctrine bars members of the armed forces from bringing “an action against the Government or armed services personnel for injuries during activity under the control or supervision of a commanding officer.” (internal citation omitted)). The district court properly dismissed Caesar’s breach of contract claim because money damages are not an available remedy for the government’s breach of an enlistment contract. See Jablon v. United States, 657 F.2d 1064, 1066 (9th Cir. 1981). AFFIRMED. 2 16-16505

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.