Young v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SWEENEY, Judge.
In this action, plaintiff Rickie J. Young, appearing pro se, seeks to collaterally attack a prior judgment of this court, affirmed on appeal, that his claim for wrongful discharge was barred by the statute of limitations. Defendant moves to dismiss plaintiffs instant complaint based on the doctrine of claim preclusion. Because the prior judgment was not a judgment on the merits, the court finds the doctrine of claim preclusion inapplicable in this case. However, as discussed below, the court lacks jurisdiction over plaintiffs complaint on both issue preclusion…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Hughes v. RoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Young v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
- Fillmore Equipment of Holland, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
- Lewis v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- Alford v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- Ackerman v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.