21 Cited authorities

  1. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America

    511 U.S. 375 (1994)   Cited 19,123 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that absent a reservation of jurisdiction in the stipulated dismissal order, federal courts lack jurisdiction to consider enforcement of a settlement agreement
  2. Capitol Leasing Co. v. F.D.I.C

    999 F.2d 188 (7th Cir. 1993)   Cited 662 times
    Affirming district court's dismissal of plaintiff's claim for failure to follow the procedures mandated by 12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)
  3. Evers v. Astrue

    536 F.3d 651 (7th Cir. 2008)   Cited 242 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding Bivens claim that defendants “ ‘pinned a badge of infamy’ upon [plaintiff] by the mere fact of terminating his contract ” to be “essentially contractual” and thus fall within CDA
  4. Muscarello v. Ogle County Board of Commissioners

    610 F.3d 416 (7th Cir. 2010)   Cited 154 times
    Finding that the plaintiff was domiciled in Arizona despite prior connections to Illinois where: her permanent residence was in Arizona; she intended to remain in Arizona; she spent seven months of the year in Arizona; she had a driver's license and voter registration in Arizona; and she listed her Arizona address with Medicare, Social Security, and on various property tax bills
  5. Katz v. Cisneros

    16 F.3d 1204 (Fed. Cir. 1994)   Cited 78 times
    Holding that "a grant of benefits and subsequent oversight by HUD is insufficient to establish a contractual obligation between [plaintiff] and the government."
  6. Newell Operating Co. v. International Union of United Automobile, Aerospace, & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, U.A.W.

    532 F.3d 583 (7th Cir. 2008)   Cited 38 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Noting that § 1132 allows for a suit for a declaratory judgment
  7. Dia Navigation Co. v. Pomeroy

    34 F.3d 1255 (3d Cir. 1994)   Cited 40 times
    Finding the INS's regulations were legislative in nature, and thus subject to APA's notice and comment procedure
  8. Texas Health Choice v. Office of Personnel

    400 F.3d 895 (Fed. Cir. 2005)   Cited 22 times
    Holding that the underlying contract was governed by the CDA so the district court did not have jurisdiction under the APA
  9. Sarang Corp. v. U.S.

    No. 06-506C (Fed. Cl. May. 25, 2007)   Cited 8 times

    No. 06-506C. Filed May 25, 2007. J. Cobbie de Graft, Law Offices of J. Cobbie de Graft, Herndon, Virginia, counsel for Plaintiff. Robert E. Chandler, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch, Washington, D.C., counsel for Defendant. Claim; Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. § 601, et seq.; Federal Acquisition Regulations, 48 C.F.R. §§ 2.101, 33.208, 33.210; Interest; Motion to Dismiss, RCFC 12(b)(1), (b)(6); Prompt Payment Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3901, et seq. MEMORANDUM

  10. Pershing Div., Donaldson, Lufkin Jen. v. U.S.

    22 F.3d 741 (7th Cir. 1994)   Cited 16 times
    Holding that § 1367 supplemental jurisdiction cannot override the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims to hear certain damage claims against the United States
  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 347,250 times   923 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
  12. Section 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 97,720 times   135 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."
  13. Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1367   Cited 62,061 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"
  14. Section 1346 - United States as defendant

    28 U.S.C. § 1346   Cited 24,094 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Determining liability to the claimant "in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred"
  15. Section 1491 - Claims against United States generally; actions involving Tennessee Valley Authority

    28 U.S.C. § 1491   Cited 4,643 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the standard in 5 U.S.C. § 706
  16. Section 7101 - Definitions

    41 U.S.C. § 7101   Cited 214 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a "contactor" is "a party to a Federal Government contract other than the Federal Government"
  17. Section 7103 - Decision by contracting officer

    41 U.S.C. § 7103   Cited 161 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Setting a six-year limitations period for contract claims against the government
  18. Section 7104 - Contractor's right of appeal from decision by contracting officer

    41 U.S.C. § 7104   Cited 98 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Providing that an action in federal court challenging a contracting officer's final decision must be filed within twelve months of receipt of the decision
  19. Section 7102 - Applicability of chapter

    41 U.S.C. § 7102   Cited 87 times
    Excepting appeals "arising out of maritime contracts" from the jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims or the agency boards of contract appeals
  20. Section 52.212-4 - Contract Terms and Conditions-Commercial Products and Commercial Services

    48 C.F.R. § 52.212-4   Cited 21 times
    Requiring procurement contractors to "comply with all applicable Federal, State and local laws, executive orders, rules and regulations applicable to its performance under this contract"