Legal Opinion

Meyers v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided December 23, 2010No. 09-538 CPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BUSH, Judge.

Now pending before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss, which has been fully briefed and is ripe for a decision by the court. Because this court lacks jurisdiction over Counts I and II of plaintiffs’ complaint, those counts must be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (RCFC). With respect to Count III of the complaint, the court holds that plaintiffs have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Accordingly, Count III of the complaint must be dismissed pursuant to RCFC 12(b)(6). For those…

2Cases cited59 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Land of Lincoln Mutual Health Insurance Company v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
  2. Kenneth Earman v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
  3. Doe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2012
  4. Madison v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
  5. Allen v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014

6 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