collateral order doctrine

The GEO Group, Inc. v. Menocal

Issues

Can a government contractor immediately appeal a denied claim for “derivative sovereign immunity” under the collateral-order doctrine?

Menocal and other detainees (“Menocal”) filed a class action against GEO Group, Inc. (“GEO”), alleging forced labor and unjust enrichment. GEO argues it is shielded from suit because, under the Yearsley doctrine, a contractor has immunity for actions performed at the government’s direction. GEO further contends that the lower courts’ denials of these claims are immediately appealable under the collateral-order doctrine. Menocal asserts that the Yearsley doctrine does not provide immunity from suit, only a defense, and that the lower court’s denial is not immediately appealable. The outcome of this case implicates the right to bring a suit against government contractors and will impact public welfare.

Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties

Whether an order denying a government contractor’s claim of derivative sovereign immunity is immediately appealable under the collateral-order doctrine.

The GEO Group, Inc. (“GEO”) operates the Aurora Immigration Processing Center (“AIPC”) under a contract with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”). The GEO Group, Inc. v. Menocal, et. al. at 3. Alejandro Menocal was a detainee at AIPC in Aurora, Colorado, from June 2014 to September 2014.

Submit for publication
0
Subscribe to collateral order doctrine