Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Kari Beck, Personal Representative of the Estate of Cameron Gayle Beck, et al. v. United States
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, No. 24-1332 · judgment January 13, 2025
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
In Brooks v. United States, 337 U.S. 49 (1949), the Court held that servicemembers traveling in their vehicle on personal business could bring a claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) for injuries they suffered because of a governmental employee’s negligent driving. A year later, in Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950), the Court held that servicemembers could not bring claims “where the injuries arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to service.” The Court has left unresolved the legal test for determining what is “incident to service” and the dividing line between Brooks and Feres. The circuits are in open conflict over this question. Here, the Eighth Circuit held that an active-duty servicemember who was killed by a negligent government employee while riding his motorcycle home for lunch was nonetheless injured incident to service and, thus, his family’s claim was barred. Other circuits have allowed servicemembers’ claims under similar facts. This conflict about the test for “incident to service” has barred servicemembers from bringing tort claims for injuries with no material connection to their military duties or military service. The Questions Presented are: 1. Whether the Feres doctrine’s bar against a servicemember’s ability to bring tort claims “incident to service” is only triggered when the injury was directly caused by the servicemember’s military duties or orders.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Nathan S. Mammen
Snell & Wilmer LLP
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 7 conferences
Amicus briefs
2 cert-stage
Argument & decision
Decided November 24, 2025.
Proceedings
- Nov 24 2025Petition DENIED. Justice Gorsuch would grant the petition for a writ of certiorari. Statement of Justice Sotomayor respecting the denial of certiorari. (Detached Opinion) Justice Thomas, dissenting from denial of certiorari. (Detached Opinion)
- Nov 17 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/21/2025.
- Nov 10 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/14/2025.
- Nov 03 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/7/2025.
- Oct 14 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/17/2025.
- Oct 06 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/10/2025.
- Aug 06 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
- Aug 05 2025Reply of petitioners Kari Beck, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Jul 21 2025Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
- May 23 2025Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 21, 2025.
- May 22 2025Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 20, 2025 to July 21, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
- May 20 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/5/2025.
- May 20 2025Response Requested. (Due June 20, 2025)
- May 16 2025Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
- Apr 17 2025Brief amici curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center, et al. filed.
- Apr 17 2025Brief amicus curiae of National Veterans Legal Services Program filed.
- Apr 11 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 16, 2025)