Legal Opinion

Castillo Morales v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided February 1, 1990No. 438-89TPublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

MOODY R. TIDWELL, III, Judge:

This case is now before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.1 Consideration of this motion requires the court to accept plaintiffs’ allegations as true, and draw all reasonable inferences in plaintiffs’ favor. Mortensen v. First Fed. Sav. and Loan Ass’n, 549 F.2d 884, 891 (3d Cir.1977). The court is mindful that plaintiffs are represented pro se. The court will, therefore, indulge plaintiffs in all fair and reasonable characterizations of the allegations in their complaint.

FACTS

The complaint, with its attached…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Mortensen v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
  3. Eastport Steamship Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
  4. Bull v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  5. Phillips v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1931

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Skillo v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
  2. Fry v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
  3. Betz v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1998
  4. Cherbanaeff v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
  5. Earnest v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1995

7 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