Legal Opinion

Peninsula Group Capital Corp. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided August 6, 2010No. 09-747CPublishedCited by 62 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

FUTEY, Judge.

This case comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, under Rule 12(b)(1) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (“Rules”).1 Plaintiff, Peninsula Group Capital Corporation, alleges that defendant, the United States Army Reserve and Department of the Army, breached a contract to transfer real estate from defendant to plaintiff. Plaintiff also brings two claims related to that contract: a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fan-dealing and a taking of plaintiffs personal property…

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  4. McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  5. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by62 opinions

  1. Waltner v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
  2. Austin v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
  3. Liberty Ammunition, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
  4. Olivier Plantation, LLC v. St. Bernard ParishDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2010
  5. Threshold Technologies, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014

57 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