Legal Opinion

Lower Brule Sioux Tribe v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided December 1, 2011No. 06-922 LPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION and ORDER

BLOCK, Judge.

Before the court is defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1), Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”). Center stage once again is 28 U.S.C. § 1500, the source of much controversy over the years. Simply put, § 1500 bars this court from exercising jurisdiction over any suit “for or in respect to” the same claim as a suit pending in any other court. What this means in practice has produced inconsistent results that make this statute anything but simple in its application.

Indeed, just a few…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  2. McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  3. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  4. United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. Karen S. Reynolds v. Army and Air Force Exchange ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Klamath Irrigation District v. the United States 01-591l and 01-5910l Through 01United States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
  2. Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
  3. Muscogee (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
  4. Northwestern Band of Shoshone v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
  5. Wyandot Nation of Kansas v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014

3 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