Legal Opinion

Uniglobe General Trading & Contracting Co. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided September 27, 2012No. 10-204CPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BUSH, Judge.

Now pending before the court is defendant’s motion for partial dismissal, which has been fully briefed and is ripe for a decision by the court. Because the court concludes that it does not have subject matter jurisdiction over one of the three claims set forth in the complaint, defendant’s motion to dismiss that claim pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (RCFC) is granted.

BACKGROUND1

In this case, plaintiff seeks damages stemming from the government’s alleged breach *425of three separate contracts for the lease of vehicles in…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  4. Irwin v. Department of Veterans AffairsSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  5. Karen S. Reynolds v. Army and Air Force Exchange ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Uniglobe General Trading & Contracting Company, Wll v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
  2. Diversified Maintenance Systems, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
  3. Al-Juthoor Contracting Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API