Legal Opinion
Lea v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided March 9, 2015No. 14-1070CPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Motion to Dismiss; RCFC 12(b)(1); Motion to Stay Proceedings; Jurisdictional Discovery; Fifth Amendment Takings; Due Process; Unjust Enrichment; Conspiracy; Duplicative Claims in Two Pending Cases
OPINION AND ORDER
SWEENEY, Judge
Plaintiff Corey Lea, appealing pro se and seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis, contends that the United States, in its role as guarantor, is responsible for the damages he sustained as a result of foreclosure proceedings. Defendant moved to dismiss plaintiffs complaint for lack of jurisdiction, and in response, plaintiff moved to stay proceedings on defendant’s…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lea v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2016
- Straw v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017