Legal Opinion

Rutledge v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided August 22, 2006No. 06-555CPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*397ORDER

HORN, Judge.

Before the court is plaintiff’s pro se complaint titled “Ex Parte Claim and Petition For Redress of Grievance Pursuant to the First Article in Amendment to the Constitution for the united States of America and 28 U.S.C.S. § 2675.” (emphasis and errors in original). More than simply confusing, the plaintiffs rambling submission is near impossible to follow, rife with misconstrued and misused legal jargon, and filled with illogical sentences and puzzling exhibits. From what logic the court may gather from the plaintiffs complaint, the court construes the plaintiffs claims to…

2Cases cited85 opinions

  1. Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Immigration & Naturalization Service v. St. CyrSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  5. Hughes v. RoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Southern Nuclear Operating Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
  2. Kissi v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
  3. Mazie v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2026
  4. Pikulin v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
  5. Witchard v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API