No. 22-1154

Winglet Technology, LLC, et al. v. United States

Lower Court: District of Columbia
Docketed: 2023-05-30
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: circuit-conflict defamation discovery-standard government-certification government-liability limited-discovery personal-spite scope-of-employment westfall-act
Latest Conference: 2023-09-26
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Where the FAA disowned as verifiably false its
employee's defamatory statements about petitioners and
questioned his decision to publish them in the first place,
are petitioners entitled to limited discovery to show that
when the employee defamed them, he was not serving
any interest of his FAA master but acting only out of
personal spite and to "teach petitioners a lesson?"

2. Should this Court resolve the conflict among the
Circuits about the standard for assessing when a plaintiff
is entitled to limited discovery to challenge the
government's certification under the Westfall Act (28
U.S.C. § 2679) that its employee was acting within the
scope of his employment when he committed the alleged
tortious conduct?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Where the FAA disowned as verifiably false its employee's defamatory statements about petitioners and questioned his decision to publish them in the first place, are petitioners entitled to limited discovery to show that when the employee defamed them, he was not serving any interest of his FAA master but acting only out of personal spite and to 'teach petitioners a lesson?

Docket Entries

2023-10-02
Petition DENIED.
2023-07-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-06-29
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-05-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due June 29, 2023)

Attorneys

USA
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Winglet, et al.
Robert David SchulteSchulte Booth, P.C., Petitioner