Lower Brule Sioux Tribe v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
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
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
- United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- 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
- Klamath Irrigation District v. the United States 01-591l and 01-5910l Through 01United States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
- Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- Muscogee (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- Northwestern Band of Shoshone v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- Wyandot Nation of Kansas v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.