Legal Opinion

Milgroom v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided August 19, 2015No. 15-193CPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pro Se; Res Judicata; Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction; Due Process; Judicial Taking; Tort.

OPINION

HORN, J.

Plaintiffs, Robert B. Milgroom, and Nada Marti, both pro se, filed a complaint together in this court on March 2, 2015. Together, plaintiffs allege violations of the Fourth, Fifth, and Tenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and claim that the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii took their real property and personal property without just compensation. The co-plaintiffs are seeking $9 million in damages, $8 million for the real property allegedly taken in…

2Cases cited135 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  4. Estelle v. GambleSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Petro-Hunt, L.L.C. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
  2. Hawkins v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2018
  3. Myles v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021
  4. Petro-Hunt, L.L.C. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
  5. Straw v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017

1 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