Legal Opinion
Metzger, Shadyac & Schwartz v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided June 12, 1986No. 512-85CPublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
BRUGGINK, Judge.
Pending before the court is Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss, for lack of jurisdiction, propounded under RUSCC 12(b)(1). The pleadings, submissions and oral argument have been considered. For reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.
FACTS
The complaint alleges a contract between plaintiffs, members of a law firm, and the United States acting through the Department of Interior (DOI). The alleged contract originates from a claim brought by Environment Consultants, Inc. (ECI) against DOI, before the department’s board of contract appeals (No. IBCA-1192-5-78). ECI was…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Richard L. Thoen v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Jerome Jablon, M.D. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Visual Sciences, Inc. v. Integrated Communications Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Eaton v. Dorchester Development, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Burgess v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1990
- Blaze Construction, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1993
- Cincinnati Electronics Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1994
- Siegal v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
- Sanders v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1995
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.