Unpublished Disposition, 857 F.2d 1477 (9th Cir. 1986)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 857 F.2d 1477 (9th Cir. 1986)

Yvonne Iris BELANGER, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 87-4107.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 11. 1988.* Decided Sept. 2, 1988.

James M. Fitzgerald, Chief Judge, Presiding.

Before MERRILL, REINHARDT, and CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

Belanger appeals the summary judgment of the district court dismissing with prejudice her action for medical malpractice brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Dismissal was on the ground that her claim was time barred. 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) provides that a claim against the United States shall be forever barred unless it is presented to the appropriate agency within two years after it accrues or unless action is brought within six months after denial of the claim. Belanger's claim was timely presented to the appropriate agency. The claim was duly denied, and on October 11, 1985, Belanger was notified by letter of the denial and that suit could be brought within six months of the mailing date of the letter if Belanger was dissatisfied. Suit was not brought until October 2, 1986.

Belanger contends that since her claim was timely filed with the federal agency, she has complied with the statute. However, this court has interpreted Sec. 2401(b) as requiring both that the claim be filed within two years and that suit be brought within six months of the denial of the claim. Dyniewicz v. United States, 742 F.2d 484, 485 (9th Cir. 1984); see also Willis v. United States, 719 F.2d 608, 612-13 (2nd Cir. 1983); Schuler v. United States, 628 F.2d 199, 201-202 (D.C. Cir. 1980).

The procedure for notifying claimants that their claim has been denied is 28 CFR 14.19(a). Belanger contends that the government, in giving notice of denial of the claim, failed to comply with the exact language of the regulation which she contends is "much stronger" in its requirements than the language of the statute. We find no merit whatsoever in this contention. Belanger was clearly notified of her filing deadline.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously agrees that this case is appropriate for submission without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4

 **

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3

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.