United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 04-2466
MARY JANE CALLAHAN, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs, Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Hon. Reginald C. Lindsay, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Torruella, Circuit Judge,
Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge,
and Lipez, Circuit Judge.
James P. Duggan, on brief, for appellants.
Steve Frank, Attorney, Appellate Staff, Civil Division, with
whom Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Michael J.
Sullivan, United States Attorney, Jeffrey S. Bucholtz, Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, and Robert S. Greenspan, Attorney,
Appellate Staff, were on brief, for appellee United States of
America.
William A. Brown, with whom Kate Miller Brown, were on brief,
for appellee Robert Fitzpatrick.
October 18, 2005
TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge. In this appeal, we consider
Plaintiff's claim against the United States under the Federal Tort
Claims Act. The district court found that it did not have subject
matter jurisdiction because Plaintiff's claim accrued more than two
years before she filed her administrative complaint and that the
doctrine of fraudulent concealment did not toll this requirement.
Plaintiff contests these findings of the district court. We
affirm.
I. Background
Mary Jane Callahan ("Plaintiff"), individually and as
administratrix of the estate of John B. Callahan ("Callahan"), and
members of her family filed suit for wrongful death and emotional
distress arising from the murder of her husband. The suit is
founded in a long and sordid history between Boston FBI agents and
the Winter Hill Gang, an organized crime syndicate in Boston.
Defendants are the United States and individuals who were once
members of the FBI, the Winter Hill Gang, or both. This corrupt
relationship produced many unfortunate victims, several of whom
have already sought relief in the federal courts. See generally
McIntyre v. United States, 367 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2004); United
States v. Salemme, 91 F. Supp. 2d 141 (D. Mass. 1999), rev'd in
part, sub nom., United States v. Flemmi, 225 F.3d 78 (1st Cir.
2000).
-2-
This appeal concerns only Plaintiff's claim as
administratrix of Callahan's estate against the United States. The
district court dismissed all claims by individual plaintiffs for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction for their failure to file an
administrative claim. Callahan v. United States, 337 F. Supp. 2d
348, 350 n.1 (D. Mass. 2004). In an order dated September 28,
2004, the district court also dismissed all claims against
individual defendants for expiration of the statute of limitations
or want of prosecution. Plaintiff does not appeal those
dismissals.
The claim against the United States is through the
Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), under which the United States
consents to suits against it in tort. 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b); 28
U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680. One condition of the FTCA is that a plaintiff
must file an administrative claim within two years of the accrual
of her claim. Id. § 2401(b). Below, the government did not
dispute the Plaintiff's jurisdictional allegations, and the
district court accepted Plaintiff's allegations as true. Even
accepting the Plaintiff's allegations as true, however, the
district court found that her claim accrued more than two years
before she filed her administrative complaint. The court below
thus dismissed the remaining claim for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction. Callahan, 377 F. Supp. 2d at 370.
-3-
We present a summary of the factual events surrounding
Callahan's murder as alleged by the Plaintiff and supplemented by
uncontested facts from news reports and court documents. See
Valentín v. Hosp. Bella Vista, 254 F.3d 358, 363 (1st Cir. 2001).
A. The Winter Hill Gang and the FBI
The Winter Hill Gang was the name for the dominant
organized crime syndicate in the Boston area in the 1970s and
1980s. The Gang's activities included murder, bribery, extortion,
loan sharking, and illegal gambling. James "Whitey" Bulger
("Bulger") and Stephen "The Rifleman" Flemmi ("Flemmi") were two
prominent members of the Gang.
In 1967, FBI Agent H. Paul Rico ("Rico") recruited Flemmi
as an FBI informant. In 1976, Agent John Connolly ("Connolly")
recruited Bulger as an informant. Connolly and Bulger were
childhood neighbors in South Boston. Eventually, both Bulger and
Flemmi were promoted to the status of "Top Echelon" informant. The
Winter Hill Gang's main rival in crime was the Boston branch of La
Cosa Nostra, another organized crime syndicate. The FBI wanted to
bring down La Cosa Nostra and Bulger and Flemmi were very pleased
to help it do so.
This convenient relationship eventually took a turn for
the worse. While they were informants, Bulger and Flemmi were
responsible for multiple murders, including those of Roger Wheeler,
Brian Halloran, and Callahan, to be discussed below. The FBI,
-4-
intent on keeping its informants happy, turned a blind eye to their
crimes and failed to follow FBI guidelines for dealing with
informants. For example, FBI agents interfered with the
investigation of Bulger and Flemmi for the murder of Callahan by
preventing Oklahoma FBI agents from interviewing them. The FBI
also informed Bulger and Flemmi of a "bugged" location to prevent
them from incriminating themselves. At the same time, Bulger and
Flemmi ingratiated themselves to the FBI by assisting the agents.
For example, when FBI Agent John Morris ("Morris"), Agent
Connolly's supervisor, was in Georgia for training and he wanted
his secretary to fly to meet him for a romantic tryst, Bulger and
Flemmi paid for her plane ticket. This cozy relationship created
a protective shield around Bulger and Flemmi that emboldened them
in their criminal activities -- so much so that at one point Flemmi
stated that the FBI gave Bulger and him free reign to commit any
crime short of murder.
Eventually, this cozy relationship between the FBI and
Bulger and Flemmi broke down when more reputable law enforcement
agents charged Bulger and Flemmi with numerous crimes. Agent
Connolly tipped off Bulger, who, to this day, is in hiding from law
enforcement authorities. Agent Morris was granted immunity for his
testimony, and he testified against Flemmi.
-5-
B. Callahan's Death
Callahan was chief executive officer of a business called
World Jai Alai ("WJA"), owned by one Roger Wheeler ("Wheeler").
WJA operated "frontons" where customers could place bets on the
outcome of jai alai matches. In an unusual coincidence, Callahan
hired Rico, now retired from the FBI and the one who had recruited
Flemmi as an FBI informant, as head of security for WJA. Around
1981, Callahan learned that individuals were skimming profits from
WJA. He was concerned and reported his suspicions to Wheeler.1 In
response, Wheeler began an audit of WJA. To prevent Wheeler from
discovering their profit skimming, Bulger and Flemmi wanted Wheeler
killed. At their direction, John Martorano ("Martorano"), another
member of the Winter Hill Gang, murdered Wheeler in May 1981.
In January 1982, one Brian Halloran ("Halloran") began
cooperating with the FBI while being prosecuted for an unrelated
murder. He told the FBI that Bulger, Flemmi, and Callahan had
asked him to murder Wheeler but that he had declined the offer.2
1
Plaintiff stated rather cryptically in her complaint that
"[c]omplaints of this activity fell on deaf ears." From this we
presume that Callahan complained to Wheeler even though other
sources portray Callahan less innocently. See Salemme, 91
F. Supp. 2d at 208-09 ("Wheeler suspected that Callahan was
skimming money from World Jai Lai for members of the Winter Hill
Gang, including Halloran, Bulger, and Flemmi. Thus, he fired
Callahan . . . and began an audit.") (internal citations omitted).
2
Plaintiff does not admit that Callahan partook in any illegal
activity or had any involvement with the Winter Hill Gang. Agent
Morris did not believe Halloran's implication of Bulger and Flemmi
and thought Halloran was lying. We will presume that Halloran was
-6-
Halloran also stated that Bulger, Flemmi, Callahan, and Martorano
were ultimately responsible for Wheeler's murder. Agent Morris
relayed this information to Agent Connolly, who in turn informed
Bulger and Flemmi. In May 1982, Bulger and Flemmi had Halloran
killed to prevent his further cooperation with law enforcement
authorities.
In August 1982, Callahan's body was found in the trunk of
a car at the Miami airport. Plaintiff makes two allegations as to
a direct connection between the FBI and Callahan's death.3 The
first is from Plaintiff's complaint in this suit, and the second is
from her administrative complaint.
The first allegation is that the FBI's investigation of
the Wheeler murder eventually turned to Callahan. Around June
1982, Connolly informed Bulger and Flemmi that Callahan was under
investigation. Although it is not clear how Callahan could have
any incriminating information about the Wheeler murder, Bulger and
Flemmi directed Martorano to kill Callahan to prevent him from
cooperating with law enforcement authorities.
The second allegation is that Callahan told Rico that he
feared that Wheeler's death was related to Wheeler's knowledge of
the profit skimming at WJA. Rico told this to Morris and Connolly
lying and that Callahan was an upstanding citizen.
3
Both contentions are nothing more than conclusory allegations
with no support in the record.
-7-
who in turn told Bulger and Flemmi. Bulger and Flemmi directed
Martorano to kill Callahan because he knew of their profit
skimming.
C. News Reports of FBI Misconduct
As early as March 1996, Boston newspapers reported
possible FBI complicity in the Callahan murder. A March 1996
article reported that Callahan, Bulger, and Flemmi had asked
Halloran to kill Wheeler; Callahan told Halloran that Martorano had
killed Wheeler with Flemmi's help; investigators were probing
whether the Wheeler, Halloran, and Callahan murders were related;
and "sources and published reports have long said that Bulger was
an informant for the FBI." Ralph Ranalli, The Jai Alai Murders,
Boston Herald, Mar. 10-11, 1996. A July 1997 article stated that
the FBI kept using Bulger and Flemmi as informants even though they
were suspects in the murders of Wheeler, Halloran, and Callahan.
Ralph Ranalli, FBI Used Whitey Despite his Ties to Three Murders,
Boston Herald, July 7, 1997. A December 1997 article reported that
federal court hearings will "probe whether FBI agents and federal
organized crime prosecutors violated any federal laws or guidelines
in the way they handled informants" like Bulger and Flemmi, and
that Florida police investigating the Callahan murder are "hoping
[the] hearings . . . will lead to a break in the case." Ralph
Ranalli, Police Reopen Mob Murder Probe, Boston Herald, Dec. 15,
1997.
-8-
National television broadcasts reported similar
information. On March 15, 1998, the broadcast "CNN Impact"
reported that Bulger and Flemmi were FBI informants and that
possible connections existed between Bulger and Flemmi and the
murders of Wheeler, Halloran, and Callahan. On May 10, 1998, the
television program "60 Minutes" reported that Flemmi stated that
the FBI gave Bulger and him "free reign to commit just about any
crime." The broadcast also referred to the Callahan murder and
stated that the FBI might "have allowed [Bulger and Flemmi] to get
away with murder."
D. Agent Morris's 1998 Testimony
Agent Morris testified in April 1998 that the FBI had
informed Bulger and Flemmi that Halloran was implicating them in
Wheeler's murder and that he believed that Bulger and Flemmi may
have killed Halloran. Salemme, 91 F. Supp. 2d at 209. Agent
Morris also testified that he informed Bulger and Flemmi of a
location bugged by Massachusetts State Police to prevent them from
incriminating themselves. Id. at 202. Boston newspapers reported
his sensational testimony. See Shelley Murphy, Worst Fears Came
True as Informant Lost Race for his Life, Boston Globe, Apr. 23,
1998; Ralph Ranalli, Ex-FBI Honcho: Agent Tipped Mobsters on
Stoolie, Boston Herald, Apr. 23, 1998.
-9-
E. Martorano's Plea Agreement
Long before Martorano agreed to plead guilty to a score
of murders, Boston newspapers reported that Martorano was a suspect
in the Callahan murder and that a possible plea bargain was in the
works between Martorano and federal prosecutors. See Ralph
Ranalli, Gangster's Mob Testimony Held up by Agency Fighting,
Boston Herald, Nov. 16, 1998; Ralph Ranalli, States Close in on
Deal to Hear Mobster, Boston Herald, Feb. 4, 1999; Andrea Estes &
Ralph Ranalli, Reputed Mobster on Verge of Plea-Bargain Deal,
Boston Herald, May 13, 1999.
On September 9, 1999, portions of Martorano's agreement
to plead guilty to a number of murders, including the Callahan
murder, were made public.4 Boston newspapers heavily reported the
plea agreement, including that he would plead guilty to the murder
of Callahan. A September 12 article also reported that Martorano
would implicate Bulger and Flemmi, even though this portion of the
plea agreement remained sealed. Andrea Estes, Outraged Hit Man
Turned Rat for Revenge, Boston Herald, Sept. 12, 1999. The same
article quoted Mrs. Callahan as trying to forgive Martorano for
killing Callahan. Id. The article also stated that Wheeler had
"suspected the Winter Hill Gang was skimming profits" from his
company and that "Martorano believes the FBI told Flemmi and Bulger
4
The portion that remained sealed listed individuals Martorano
would testify against in exchange for his plea. Callahan, 337 F.
Supp. 2d at 352 n.4.
-10-
about Wheeler's suspicions." Id. See also Andrea Estes, Notorious
Mobster Strikes Plea bargain with Feds, Boston Herald, Sept. 9,
1999 (reporting that Martorano agreed to plead guilty to the murder
of Callahan and that "Callahan . . . helped Bulger and Flemmi
orchestrate Wheeler's murder and had to be killed to prevent him
from squealing"); Andrea Estes, Murderous Rats Mobster Ties Bulger,
Flemmi to Murders, Boston Herald, Sept. 10, 1999 ("[Martorano] will
. . . accuse [Bulger and Flemmi] of ordering the murder of John
Callahan . . . ."); Shelley Murphy, US Attorney Defends Deal with
Hit Man, Boston Globe, Sept. 10, 1999 (reporting that Martorano
would "plead guilty to the murder of Callahan").
On September 30, 1999, Martorano admitted to the murders
of ten persons, not including Wheeler and Callahan, in federal
court. Boston newspapers reported this event and also noted that
Martorano would later plead guilty to the murders of Wheeler and
Callahan. Andrea Estes, Hitman Cops to Killings in Squeal Deal,
Boston Herald, Oct. 1, 1999.
On March 20, 2001, Martorano pleaded guilty in Florida
state court to murdering Callahan.
F. Judge Wolf's Opinion in United States v. Salemme
On September 15, 1999, Judge Wolf issued his opinion in
United States v. Salemme, detailing the corrupt relationship
between Bulger, Flemmi, and the FBI. Of particular relevance here,
the opinion contained a section titled "The Wheeler, Halloran, and
-11-
Callahan Murders" where Judge Wolf discussed the connections
between the three murders, Bulger and Flemmi, and the FBI.
Salemme, 91 F. Supp. 2d at 208-13. For example, he noted how FBI
agents protected Bulger and Flemmi from prosecution for the
Callahan murder by preventing Oklahoma FBI agents from interviewing
them. Id. at 211-13. In addition, he discussed how Bulger and
Flemmi paid for Agent Morris's secretary to fly to meet Morris for
a romantic tryst. Id. at 210. Boston newspapers reported the
sensational details the next day. Shelley Murphy, Bulger Tip-off
Gains Credence; Judge Believes FBI Agent Told Gangster of
Indictment, Boston Globe, Sept. 16, 1999; Andrea Estes, Judge
Blasts FBI Over Deal with Killers Whitey and Flemmi; Judge Says Hub
FBI Broke all the Rules, Boston Herald, Sept. 16, 1999.
G. FBI's Interactions with Plaintiff
Soon after the murder of Callahan, FBI agents met
Plaintiff and told her that Callahan's murder "was not a
professional hit" and that he was "probably killed by Cuban
gangsters." Several times between 1982 and 2001, when Martorano
pleaded guilty to the murder of Callahan, Plaintiff asked FBI
agents about the murder of Callahan, and FBI agents refused to tell
her anything.
On August 30, 1999, Plaintiff met with FBI agents at the
agents' request. The agents told her of a possible plea agreement
with the man who murdered Callahan, but they refused to state his
-12-
name. Plaintiff specifically asked FBI agents "whether certain
newspaper accounts involving [Callahan's murder] and John Martarano
[sic] were true," and the agents responded that she "should not
rely on newspaper accounts" and that "the reports were inaccurate."
H. Plaintiff's Administrative Complaint
On May 14, 2002, Plaintiff filed an administrative
complaint with the FBI on behalf of Callahan's estate claiming
in April of 2001, one John Martorano admitted
to killing Callahan. Claimant then learned
that Martorano was hired to kill her husband
on behalf of [Bulger and Flemmi]. Bulger and
Flemmi learned that the victim had information
that they were "skimming" profits from World
Jai Alai in Miami. Bulger and Flemmi learned
this from H. Paul Rico . . . . The
information was passed from Rico to FBI agents
Morris and Connolly who in turn alerted Bulger
and Flemmi.
II. Accrual under the FTCA
"It is 'elementary' that the United States, as sovereign,
is immune from suit unless it has consented to be sued." Skwira v.
United States, 344 F.3d 64, 72 (1st Cir. 2003) (citing United
States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 (1980)). "Moreover, a waiver
of the Government's sovereign immunity will be strictly construed,
in terms of its scope, in favor of the sovereign." Lane v. Peña,
518 U.S. 187, 192 (1996). The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA)
waives sovereign immunity by giving consent to suits "for injury or
loss of property, or personal injury or death caused by the
negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the
-13-
Government while acting within the scope of his office or
employment." 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b); 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671-2680. One
condition of this waiver is that a claim "shall be forever barred
unless it is presented in writing to the appropriate Federal agency
within two years after such claim accrues." Id. § 2401(b). "[T]he
general rule under the [FTCA is] that a tort claim accrues at the
time of the plaintiff's injury." United States v. Kubrick, 444
U.S. 111, 120 (1979).
A. Discovery Rule
In Kubrick, the Supreme Court recognized a discovery rule
for medical malpractice claims under the FTCA. Id. at 113. Under
the discovery rule, the plaintiff's claim accrues when she "knows
both the existence and the cause of [her] injury." Id. We have
previously considered the Supreme Court's reasoning in Kubrick and
applied the discovery rule to claims under the FTCA involving
theft, Attallah v. United States, 955 F.2d 776, 778-79 (1st Cir.
1992), and wrongful death, Skwira, 344 F.3d at 75. For claims
other than medical malpractice, we apply a more forgiving rule
because "the identity of the individual(s) responsible for an
injury may be less evident." Id. at 77. In such cases, a
plaintiff's claim accrues only when she also knows "that there is
a causal connection between the government and her injury." Id. at
78.
-14-
The "knowledge" standard under the discovery rule has two
qualifications. First, "something less than definitive knowledge
is required." Skwira, 344 F.3d at 78. Accrual is triggered by
"the discovery of sufficient facts about the injury and its cause
to prompt a reasonable person to inquire and seek advice
preliminary to deciding if there is a basis for filing an
administrative claim against the government." Id. Second, a
plaintiff is charged with knowledge of facts which "in the exercise
of reasonable diligence [she] should have discovered." González v.
United States, 284 F.3d 281, 288 (1st Cir. 2002). This is an
objective standard. Id.
Plaintiff filed an administrative claim with the FBI on
May 14, 2002. The United States argues that her suit is barred
because her claim accrued more than two years before this date. We
must therefore determine (1) what facts relevant to her claim
Plaintiff knew or should have known, and (2) whether Plaintiff had
sufficient facts about the existence of her injury (that Callahan
was killed), the cause of her injury (that Bulger and Flemmi had
Callahan killed), and a causal connection between her injury and
the government to prompt her to "inquire and seek advice
preliminary to deciding if there is a basis for filing an
administrative claim against the government." Skwira, 344 F.3d at
78. Plaintiff clearly knew of her injuries soon after Callahan's
death. Thus, we must determine the facts relevant to showing that
-15-
Bulger and Flemmi had Callahan killed and showing that the
government was causally connected to the murder.
The dismissal of the complaint in this case was not based
on what facts Plaintiff actually knew. Rather, the district court
concluded, in light of a variety of uncontested facts, that
Plaintiff should have known of her claim by October 1, 1999. Here,
as below, the facts themselves are not at issue. We determine only
whether the judge was correct to conclude, as a matter of law, that
the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Plaintiff
objectively should have known of her claim by October 1, 1999.
While review of Rule 12(b)(1) dismissals requires deference to a
judge's factual findings, our review of this case, which involves
only a question of law, is de novo. Valentín, 254 F.3d at 363.
See also Skwira, 344 F.3d at 71-72.
Plaintiff's complaint describes two possible theories of
causation. The first theory is that the FBI created a "protective
shield" around Bulger and Flemmi. This protective shield not only
allowed them to escape prosecution for past crimes but emboldened
them to commit future crimes. The second theory, and the one
emphasized on appeal, is that the FBI told Bulger and Flemmi
information that prompted them to kill Callahan. The information
was either that the FBI was seeking information from Callahan
regarding the Wheeler murder or that Callahan knew that Bulger and
Flemmi were skimming profits from WJA.
-16-
These two theories roughly correspond to the two theories
this court considered for the two groups of appellants in McIntyre
v. United States. 367 F.3d 38, 53-54, 57-58 (1st Cir. 2004). For
the Wheeler appellants (family of the same Wheeler referred to in
this case), we addressed the claim that the FBI "provided Bulger
and Flemmi with a 'protective shield' against prosecution and
investigation that gave the two criminals the opportunity to commit
crimes and emboldened them to do so, proximately causing Wheeler's
murder." Id. at 58. For the McIntyre appellants, we addressed the
claim that "the FBI caused McIntyre's death . . . by leaking his
confidential informant status to Bulger and Flemmi, in violation of
a special duty of non-disclosure owed to him by the government."
Id. at 54. Although the two theories are "fundamentally
different," id. at 57, the dispositive issue for the Wheelers and
the McIntyres was not the theory itself, but when the plaintiffs
knew or should have known of the facts supporting the theory, id.
at 54-55, 59.
In McIntyre, we specifically reserved the question of
whether a plaintiff could put forth multiple theories of causation
for the same tort. Id. at 54 n.6. We now hold that although a
plaintiff is free to put forth multiple theories of causation, the
only relevant theory for purposes of tolling the statute of
limitations is the first one in time to establish the requisite
causation. A plaintiff's claim accrues at the time when she knew
-17-
or should have known of a causal connection between her injury and
the government. Thus, a claim accrues if there is any causal
connection. Putting forth a specific theory of causation based on
particular facts does not help a plaintiff, because only the
earliest theory of causation matters for accrual analysis.5
In this case, Plaintiff is emphasizing her second theory
on appeal, presumably because it will create a later accrual date
than her first theory. The second theory, however, cannot change
the fact that causation could have been known at an earlier date
under the first theory. Even if Plaintiff discovered tomorrow a
new, crucial fact related to causation -- e.g., that Agent Connolly
gave Martorano the gun used to kill Callahan -- Plaintiff could not
change the fact that she should have known of causation at an
earlier date. We will thus determine accrual under Plaintiff's
first theory.
We now turn to when Plaintiff's claim accrued. The court
below held that Plaintiff's claim accrued no later than October 1,
1999, this date being soon after the news reporting of Martorano's
plea agreement and Judge Wolf's Salemme opinion. On appeal,
Plaintiff contends that her claim could not have accrued until
after May 14, 2000 and points to the fact that Martorano did not
5
Since the date of accrual determines the power of this court to
hear the case, we need not accept any of plaintiff's theories and
could interpose our own theory consistent with the facts of the
case.
-18-
formally plead guilty to the murder of Callahan until March 20,
2001. We agree with the court below that Plaintiff's claim accrued
no later than October 1, 1999.
We must address what Plaintiff should have known
regarding the cause of Callahan's death and the causal connection
between the government and his death. We will consider national
and Boston news reporting because "[w]here events receive
widespread publicity, plaintiffs may be charged with knowledge of
their occurrence." McIntyre, 367 F.3d at 60 (internal quotation
marks omitted). Numerous articles in Boston newspapers, as early
as 1996, speculated that Bulger and Flemmi killed Wheeler,
Halloran, and Callahan and that the FBI was somehow involved. See
supra Part I.C. In 1998, two nationwide news broadcasts, "CNN
Impact" and "60 Minutes," also speculated that Bulger and Flemmi
killed Callahan, possibly with the acquiescence of the FBI. Id.
Most importantly, Boston newspapers heavily reported
three events from federal court proceedings connected with the
Callahan murder. The first event was FBI Agent Morris's testimony
in April 1998 that the FBI had informed Bulger and Flemmi that
Halloran was implicating them in Wheeler's murder and that he
believed that Bulger and Flemmi may have killed Halloran. Agent
Morris also testified that he informed Bulger and Flemmi of a
bugged location that they should avoid. The Boston Globe and
Boston Herald reported his testimony the next day. See supra Part
-19-
I.D. While his testimony was not directly connected with the
Callahan murder, the Wheeler, Halloran, and Callahan murders were
long thought to be related. See supra Part I.C. For example, a
December 1997 article reported that federal court hearings will
"probe whether FBI agents and federal organized crime prosecutors
violated any federal laws or guidelines in the way they handled
informants" like Bulger and Flemmi, and that Florida police
investigating the Callahan murder are "hoping [the] hearings . . .
will lead to a break in the case." Ralph Ranalli, Police Reopen
Mob Murder Probe, Boston Herald, Dec. 15, 1997.
The second event, made public on September 9, 1999, was
Martorano's agreement to plead guilty to a number of murders,
including the murder of Callahan. In the following days, Boston
newspapers published several articles about Martorano's plea
agreement and his willingness to implicate Bulger and Flemmi. See
supra Part I.E. Further, Plaintiff was quoted in a September 12,
1999 article, saying that she was trying to forgive Martorano, the
killer of her husband. Andrea Estes, Outraged Hit Man Turned Rat
for Revenge, Boston Herald, Sept. 12, 1999. The same article
clearly indicates that Bulger and Flemmi were involved in the
Callahan murder and that Martorano would implicate them. Id.
The third event was the publication of Judge Wolf's
opinion in United States v. Salemme on September 15, 1999. As we
have already noted, his opinion discussed in depth the corrupt
-20-
relationship between the FBI, Bulger, and Flemmi. That Judge
Wolf's opinion contains a section titled "The Wheeler, Halloran,
and Callahan Murders" where he discusses the connections between
the three murders, Bulger and Flemmi, and the FBI is particularly
relevant. Salemme, 91 F. Supp. 2d at 208-13. He details specific
instances of clear misconduct, including attempts by the FBI to
protect Bulger and Flemmi from prosecution, and attempts by Bulger
and Flemmi to curry favor with the FBI agents. See supra Part I.F.
Given the extensive news reporting and the close
connection of the events to her husband's death, we find that
Plaintiff should have known the basic facts underlying these three
events. Further, the reporting on these three events should have
prompted Plaintiff to obtain certain publicly available documents,
namely Morris's 1998 testimony, Martorano's plea agreement, and the
Salemme decision.
The facts that Plaintiff should have known would have
"prompt[ed] a reasonable person to inquire and seek advice
preliminary to deciding if there [was] a basis for filing an
administrative claim against the government." Skwira, 344 F.3d at
78. John Martorano's plea agreement and Judge Wolf's opinion
easily provide the requisite knowledge under the discovery rule
that Bulger and Flemmi were responsible for the murder of Callahan.
Moreover, Agent Morris's testimony and Judge Wolf's opinion easily
provide the requisite knowledge that the FBI protected Bulger and
-21-
Flemmi from prosecution and emboldened them to commit crimes,
including the murder of Callahan.
Plaintiff argues that conflicting information reasonably
prevented her filing an administrative claim. First, she
emphasizes that the FBI would not release the name of Callahan's
killer as late as April 2000. Given Martorano's plea agreement,
made public on September 9, 1999, we find this argument unavailing.
Second, she contends that the FBI told her that she "should not
rely on newspaper stories" and that "reports were inaccurate."
However, such statements do not specifically contradict any
relevant information and even if they did, Plaintiff could surely
rely on publicly available court documents for accurate
information. Third, plaintiff argues that in the face of
conflicting newspaper stories, she did not have sufficient,
reliable information. Although she does not cite the newspaper
articles, she claims that as late as 1997 newspapers reported
government denials of a corrupt relationship between the FBI and
Bulger and Flemmi. However, the lack of conflicting stories in
1998 and 1999 and the publicly available court documents allow us
to easily dispose of this argument. Finally, Plaintiff makes much
of a statement in Judge Wolf's September 15, 1999 opinion:
As a result of the delayed disclosure of the
Halloran documents by the government and of
the failure of the adversary system to operate
fully and effectively on this issue, questions
remain regarding the role, if any, played by
Bulger and Flemmi in the Wheeler, Halloran,
-22-
and Callahan murders, and the full degree to
which the FBI in Boston has, from 1981 until
recently, attempted to keep and such role from
being discerned and demonstrated.
This statement, however, hurts Plaintiff more than it helps her.
Certainty is not required for a claim to accrue. Rather, Judge
Wolf's statement would prompt a reasonable person to further
investigate the matter by seeking legal advice in order to
determine whether action should be taken against the government.
This is all that is required for accrual. Skwira, 344 F.3d at 78.
B. Fraudulent Concealment
Like the discovery rule, the doctrine of fraudulent
concealment is a means available to plaintiffs seeking to toll the
statute of limitations. In order for a plaintiff to prevail on a
fraudulent concealment claim, the defendant "'must have engaged in
fraud or deliberate concealment of material facts relating to his
wrongdoing and the plaintiff must have failed to discover these
facts within the normal limitations period despite his exercise of
due diligence.'" Torres Ramírez v. Bermúdez García, 898 F.2d 224,
229 (1st Cir. 1990) (quoting Hernández Jiménez v. Calero Toledo,
604 F.2d 99, 101 (1st Cir. 1979)). During the course of this
sordid affair, the FBI almost surely engaged in fraudulent
concealment by denying any FBI complicity in the criminal
activities of Bulger and Flemmi. We need not specifically address
this, however, because we find that any fraudulent concealment by
the FBI ended no later than October 1, 1999.
-23-
Plaintiff claims that the FBI engaged in fraudulent
concealment when agents refused to tell her who killed Callahan.
Any purported fraudulent concealment of this fact ended when
portions of Martorano's plea agreement were made public on
September 9, 1999. The public portion of the plea agreement stated
that Martorano would plead guilty to the murder of Callahan. Even
if after this date FBI agents refused to tell Plaintiff who killed
Callahan, this fact was no longer concealed.
Plaintiff also claims fraudulent concealment as a result
of FBI agents' statements to her that she "should not rely on
newspaper stories" and that "reports were inaccurate." Such
general statements cannot rise to the level of fraudulent
concealment because they do not even indicate which newspaper
stories are inaccurate or should not be relied upon. Further, the
statements have a non-fraudulent explanation. The FBI agents could
simply have been evading Plaintiff's questions because they did not
wish to discuss a pending criminal prosecution.
We have already decided in considering the discovery rule
that Plaintiff should have known of sufficient facts by October 1,
1999 to prompt a reasonable person to file an administrative claim.
The reason that Plaintiff should have known of these facts is that
they were easily discoverable had she diligently (or even not so
diligently) kept herself informed of the legal proceedings and news
reporting of events closely related to Callahan's murder. Thus,
-24-
Plaintiff had either discovered the purportedly concealed
information or was not diligent in seeking to obtain it. Either
way, we find no fraudulent concealment.
III. Conclusion
Because we find that Plaintiff's claim accrued no later
than October 1, 1999, which was more than two years before she
filed her administrative claim, and we find that any fraudulent
concealment by the government ended before this date, we affirm the
district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
under the FTCA.
Affirmed.
-25-