Legal Opinion

Artuso v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided January 31, 2008No. 07-699TPublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

LETTOW, Judge.

In this tax refund case, the government has filed motions for a more definite statement and for a partial dismissal of the Complaint filed by plaintiff, Ms. Ellen-Marie Artuso. The government asks for orders directing Ms. Artuso to plead the special matters required by the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”) in tax refund cases and dismissing for lack of jurisdiction the portions of plaintiffs complaint that do not relate to a refund of taxes. The motions have been fully briefed by the parties, and oral argument is deemed unnecessary. For the reasons…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Karen S. Reynolds v. Army and Air Force Exchange ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
  4. Keene Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  5. Flora v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Buser v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  2. Gluck v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
  3. Whalen v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
  4. Simmons v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
  5. Prestop Holdings, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010

13 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