Legal Opinion
Johnson v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided August 9, 2016No. 16-149TPublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Pro Se Plaintiff; Motion for Reconsideration; RCFC 59(e)
OPINION AND ORDER
SWEENEY, Judge
Before the court is plaintiffs motion for reconsideration, filed pursuant to Rulé 59 of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”). For the reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.
I. BACKGROUND
On February 1, 2016, plaintiff, appearing pro se, filed suit in this court seeking a refund of monies he claimed were illegally levied from his pension fund. Johnson v. United States, No. 16-149T, 2016 WL 4006454, at * 1. According to plaintiff, the Internal Revenue Service’s (“IRS”) attempts to obtain…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Withrow v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Yuba Natural Resources, Inc. v. The United States, Defendant/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Fru-Con Construction Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1999
- Matthews v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2006
- Ammex, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Progressive Industries, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
- Acadiana Management Group, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021
- Audio Evolution Diagnostics, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2022
- Beberman v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
- Bgt Holdings LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2019
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.