Legal Opinion
Conti v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided January 11, 2001No. 99-987CPublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MARGOLIS, Senior Judge.
This takings claim is before the Court on government’s motion to dismiss pursuant to RCFC 12(b)(4) for failure to state a claim. After careful consideration of the parties’ written and oral arguments, the Court concludes that plaintiff has not stated a claim for relief. The government’s motion to dismiss is therefore GRANTED.
FACTS
In ruling on this motion to dismiss, the Court assumes all credible facts as alleged by plaintiff to be true.
Plaintiff, Paul Conti, resides in the port city of Gloucester, Massachusetts where he has harvested swordfish since 1985.…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- American Pelagic Fishing Company, L.P. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
- Paul Conti and Conti Corporation (As Owner of F/v Providenza) v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Carney v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
- Huntleigh USA Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- American Pelagic Fishing Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2001
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.