In United States v. Brown, 348 U.S. 110, 75 S.Ct. 141, 99 L.Ed. 139 (1954), the Supreme Court applied these cases in an action by a discharged veteran who alleged medical malpractice at a veterans' hospital. The Court wrote: The present case is, in our view, governed by Brooks, not by Feres. The injury for which suit was brought was not incurred while Brown was on active duty or subject to military discipline. The injury occurred after his discharge, while he enjoyed a civilian status. The damages resulted from a defective tourniquet applied in a veterans' hospital. Brown was there, of course, because he had been in the service and because he had received an injury in the service. And the causal relation of the injury to the service was sufficient to bring the claim under the Veterans Act. But, unlike the claims in the Feres case, this one is not foreign to the broad pattern of liability which the United States undertook by the Tort Claims Act. (Id. at 112, 75 S.Ct. 141.)