Legal Opinion
Richard v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided March 31, 2011No. 10-503 CPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SWEENEY, Judge.
Before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss. In this case, plaintiffs, the purported personal representatives of the estates of Calonnie D. Randall and Robert J. Whirlwind Horse, invoke the relevant “bad men” clause contained in Article I of the Fort Laramie Treaty of April 29,1868 (“Fort Laramie Treaty”) and seek money damages stemming from the deaths of their adult children. Defendant moves to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”),…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- 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
- McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Richard v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
- Richard v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
- Richard v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012