New Hampshire
How Feres v. United States applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts – Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and Sovereign Immunity.
New Hampshire adheres to the principles established in Feres v. United States, particularly in considering the applicability of sovereign immunity and the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) regarding injuries suffered by military personnel. The state's courts recognize that similar considerations regarding public policy and military functions are essential in tort claims involving the government.
New Hampshire courts generally follow the Feres doctrine, which bars claims against the federal government for injuries sustained by service members in the course of their duty, underscoring the public policy of non-interference with military operations.
The court held that claims against the state for injuries sustained in military service are barred under the principles of sovereign immunity and the Feres doctrine.
The court applied the Feres doctrine in determining that military service-related injuries could not be pursued under state tort law while involving sovereign immunity concerns.
This case reinforced the immunity granted to the state concerning tort claims arising from activities of armed forces personnel.
While New Hampshire law aligns closely with the federal standard established in Feres, state courts additionally emphasize state-specific sovereign immunity principles. Federal courts uniformly categorize military service injuries under the Feres doctrine, while New Hampshire courts also engage with local sovereign immunity principles that may further shield the state from tort claims.
Understanding the application of the Feres doctrine and sovereign immunity in both federal and state contexts is crucial for the New Hampshire bar exam, particularly in torts and public policy questions.