LAURIE L. WOOD v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, Niemeyer, Jan. 4, 2017,
Sovereign Immunity- FTCA– Navy’s decisions regarding training-area maintenance for use by local law-enforcement are discretionary and therefore immune from suit

Sovereign Immunity – FTCA- The Navy’s decisions regarding training-area maintenance for use by local law-enforcement are discretionary and therefore immune from suit

Facts: The Navy allowed law-enforcement to use their training facility in Virginia as long as the law-enforcement agency provided a supervisor who had completed The Navy’s Range Safety Officer training and the civilian training does not “adversely affect the military preparedness of the United States.”
Norfolk sheriffs were using the site when they attempted a 20-foot “bail-out” fall from a mock ship onto mats not designed for that purpose. One of the deputies was paralyzed when she jumped and landed in a gap between the mats. She subsequently sued the United States, alleging that the United States negligently maintained the mock-ship in a dangerous condition and failed to warn her not to use the facility in unintended ways.
Held: The US Navy’s decision to maintain its training facility in a particular manner was discretionary, and therefore

Sovereign Immunity- The United States is immune from most lawsuits unless it allows itself to be sued. The primary way that the US allows itself to be sued is through the Federal Torts Claims Act (FTCA).
Sovereign Immunity- The FTCA does not allow the United States to be sued for doing or not doing a “a discretionary function or duty.”
Sovereign Immunity- Discretion- The
“nature of the conduct” (maintaining a training facility), not the “status of the actor” (the US Navy), governs whether the discretionary function exception applies.
Sovereign Immunity- Allowing law-enforcement to use its training facilities is a discretionary function of the Navy, as is deciding how the facility will be made available.