Flores v. National Park Service

Background

Tina Flores and Raul Toscano alleged that they were injured on June 6, 2021, at Torpedo Wharf. Flores allegedly tripped and fell on a defective surface, and Toscano allegedly fell on rotten wood. They asserted an unspecified negligence claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act against the National Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, the Presidio Trust, the United States Department of the Interior, and the United States.

The plaintiffs alleged that they submitted administrative tort claims on June 6, 2023, and that the claims were denied by a letter dated April 15, 2024. Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, a lawsuit generally must be filed within six months after the agency mails a final denial. The resulting deadline was October 15, 2024. Plaintiffs’ counsel filed notices of appearance and a proposed summons on October 10, 2024, but did not file the complaint, civil cover sheet, or filing fee. After receiving electronic filing-error notices, the plaintiffs filed the complaint and civil cover sheet on November 5, 2024.

Proper Defendant

The court agreed with the parties that the United States was the only proper defendant for the Federal Tort Claims Act claim. It dismissed the National Park Service, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, the Presidio Trust, and the Department of the Interior as defendants with prejudice, leaving the United States as the remaining defendant.

Timeliness

The court granted the motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which tests whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim, based on the government’s argument that the case was filed too late. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 3 provides that a civil action begins when the complaint is filed with the court. Because the complaint was filed on November 5, 2024, it was filed after the October 15 deadline.

The plaintiffs argued that they had begun the lawsuit when their counsel electronically submitted earlier documents. The court rejected that argument because the complaint and required civil cover sheet had not been filed, the filing fee had not been paid, and the Clerk’s Office had issued an electronic filing-error notice. The court also found that the plaintiffs could have monitored the public docket and learned before the deadline that the case had not been properly filed.

The court rejected equitable tolling, a doctrine that can extend a deadline in limited circumstances. It found that the plaintiffs had not shown diligent pursuit of their rights or an extraordinary circumstance that made timely filing impossible. In the court’s view, counsel’s failure to check the docket or confirm that the complaint had been filed amounted to ordinary neglect, not an extraordinary circumstance. The court also ruled that Rule 60(b)(1), which can provide relief from a final judgment or order for reasons including mistake or excusable neglect, was unavailable because no final action had yet been entered and the plaintiffs had not requested relief through a formal motion.

Presidio Trust Claim

The plaintiffs argued that the April 15, 2024 denial letter applied only to the claim submitted to the National Park Service and that claims submitted to the Presidio Trust and other entities remained pending. The court concluded that the letter triggered the six-month deadline for claims submitted to the Department of the Interior, including the National Park Service and Golden Gate National Recreation Area.

The court nevertheless allowed the plaintiffs to amend their complaint to allege that they submitted identical claims to the National Park Service and the Presidio Trust, listed each entity as required, and did not receive notice that the National Park Service had been designated to decide the claims. If those facts could be truthfully alleged, the Presidio Trust claim might remain pending because of a possible failure to follow the federal regulation governing claims involving multiple agencies.

Disposition

The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss. Injuries based on claims submitted to the Department of the Interior, including the National Park Service and Golden Gate National Recreation Area, were dismissed without leave to amend because the lawsuit was filed after the Federal Tort Claims Act’s six-month deadline and equitable tolling did not apply. The plaintiffs were granted leave to amend only to allege facts establishing that the April 15, 2024 denial letter did not apply to the Presidio Trust claim. The amended complaint was due within 14 days of the order.