Legal Opinion
Holden v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided August 13, 1997No. 96-547LPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
YOCK, Judge.
This taking action is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, or, in the Alternative, for Partial Dismissal and a Stay of Proceedings pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(4) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (RCFC). In their Complaint, the plaintiffs aver that the United States Navy (Navy) took their unpatented mining claims that were located on public land without just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment.
After a full and careful examination of the pleadings, briefs, and other submissions by the parties, the Court denies…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Karen S. Reynolds v. Army and Air Force Exchange ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Best v. Humboldt Placer Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Cameron v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Ware v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
- Commonwealth Edison Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2000
- Freeman v. United States Department of the InteriorDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
- Vane Minerals (Us), LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
- Ford v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.