Legal Opinion
Stockton East Water District v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided October 4, 2004No. 04-541LPublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CHRISTINE O.C. MILLER, Judge.
Before the court after argument is defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to RCFC 12(b)(1) and (6) for, respectively, lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The pivotal issue to be decided is whether the statute of limitations, 28 U.S.C. § 2501 (2000), bars a takings claim, when the claim was timely filed in federal district court and thereafter transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1631 (2000), but the court had ordered plaintiffs to effect transfer over ten years earlier. Defendant also objects to…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Baldwin County Welcome Center v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Donald A. Henke v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Winstar Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- International Resource Recovery, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- L-3 Communications Integrated Systems, L.P. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- Stockton East Water District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- Stockton East Water District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
- Dalles Irrigation District v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.