Ellen Moose v. United States of America
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partHalbert, District Judge
While I concur fully in the majority’s conclusion that the dismissal of plaintiffs’ requests for mandamus and injunctive relief was appropriate, I dissent from its conclusion that Tucker Act jurisdiction is present in this case.
The sole issue on this appeal is whether the United States has waived sovereign immunity to suit. Since the Tucker Act, upon which this suit is based, is “only a jurisdictional statute,” and “does not create any substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages,” United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 398, 96 S.Ct. 948, 953, 47 L.Ed.2d 114…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. SherwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. KingSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Eastport Steamship Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1967
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.