Legal Opinion
Kabua v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided December 15, 1976No. 119-75PublishedCited by 44 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtNichols, Judge
The plaintiffs have brought this action to recover for an alleged uncompensated taking of Koi-Namur Island. The parties have filed voluminously documented cross motions for summary judgment. Among other defenses, defendant sets up the jurisdictional bar of our six-year statute of limitations, 28 U.S.C. § 2501, which applies to all claims in this court. 'Since we determine that the suit is barred for that reason, we need not consider the other matters the parties have briefed and argued, and we do not do so.
Plaintiffs say they are the indigenous landowners of Koi-Namur, which is a Micronesian…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. KingSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- United States v. DickinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- United States v. DowSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Porter v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1974
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- Lawrence C. Bieneman v. City of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
- Fallini v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Juda v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1984
- Mildenberger v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Fallini v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.