Legal Opinion

Skillo v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided November 30, 2005No. 05-494 TPublishedCited by 56 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

HEWITT, Judge.

Before the court are plaintiffs’ Complaint (Compl.), Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Def.’s Mot. or Motion), plaintiffs’ Response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Pl.’s Resp. or Response), and Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Def.’s Reply or Reply). Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (RCFC), defendant moves to dismiss the claims in plaintiffs’ Complaint “because this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider those claims.” Def.’s Mot. at 1. For the following reasons,…

2Cases cited82 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983

77 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by56 opinions

  1. Matthews v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  2. McCullough v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  3. Gray v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
  4. Edelmann v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
  5. Global Computer Enterprises, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009

51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API