Legal Opinion

Bernard v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided January 22, 2004No. 03-265CPublishedCited by 186 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND FINAL ORDER

BRADEN, Judge.

One of the most important duties of the United States Court of Federal Claims is to adjudicate money claims brought by those *499who serve and have served in the nation’s military, many of whom appear before the court on a pro se basis. For this reason, the court historically has held such litigants to a far less stringent standard in framing and presenting their claims. This latitude, however, does not relieve a pro se plaintiff from meeting jurisdictional requirements.

The court has afforded plaintiff in this case a “second chance” to present his…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Hughes v. RoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by186 opinions

  1. Jeremiah Harris v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
  2. Woodson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  3. Skillo v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
  4. Hufford v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  5. Edelmann v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007

181 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