§Why CasetextPricing

Woodruff v. United States Department of Transportation et al

MOTION to Dismiss or in the Alternative, MOTION to Transfer Case

29 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Mitchell

    445 U.S. 535 (1980)   Cited 2,328 times
    Holding that the United States does not have a specific fiduciary obligation to manage timber resources on allotted lands, held in trust for Indian-allotees

  2. United States v. Testan

    424 U.S. 392 (1976)   Cited 2,199 times
    Holding that Back Pay Act does not provide a remedy for misclassified federal employees

  3. Lehman v. Nakshian

    453 U.S. 156 (1981)   Cited 1,013 times
    Holding that exceptions to the limitations and conditions upon which the Government consents to be sued "are not to be implied"

  4. United States v. Sherwood

    312 U.S. 584 (1941)   Cited 3,397 times
    Holding that the Claims Court lacked jurisdiction over claims that are not against United States

  5. United States v. King

    395 U.S. 1 (1969)   Cited 1,034 times
    Holding that waiver of sovereign immunity “cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed”

  6. Soriano v. United States

    352 U.S. 270 (1957)   Cited 526 times
    Holding that accrual of takings claim was not postponed by the availability of an Army Claims Service remedy where Congress "ha[d] not so restricted the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims"

  7. Megapulse, Inc. v. Lewis

    672 F.2d 959 (D.C. Cir. 1982)   Cited 184 times
    Holding that "an action against the United States which is at its essence a contract claim lies within the Tucker Act and that a district court has no power to grant injunctive relief in such a case."

  8. Kidwell v. Department of Army

    56 F.3d 279 (D.C. Cir. 1995)   Cited 100 times
    Holding that "a claim is subject to the Tucker Act and its jurisdictional consequences if, in whole or in part, it explicitly or 'in essence' seeks more than $10,000 in monetary relief from the federal government."

  9. Sanders v. United States

    594 F.2d 804 (Fed. Cir. 1979)   Cited 149 times
    Holding that challenge to OER on objectivity grounds must overcome the strong, but rebuttable, presumption that administrators of the military discharge their duties "correctly, lawfully, and in good faith"

  10. Burkins v. United States

    112 F.3d 444 (10th Cir. 1997)   Cited 41 times
    Stating that "if the plaintiff's ‘prime objective’ or ‘essential purpose’ is to recover money ... from the federal government, then the Court of Federal Claims' exclusive jurisdiction is triggered"

  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 345,715 times   922 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 201 - Short title

    29 U.S.C. § 201   Cited 20,914 times   102 Legal Analyses
    Setting fourteen as the minimum age for most non-agricultural work

  13. Section 1631 - Transfer to cure want of jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1631   Cited 7,656 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to transfer action to court with proper jurisdiction

  14. Section 1491 - Claims against United States generally; actions involving Tennessee Valley Authority

    28 U.S.C. § 1491   Cited 4,638 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the standard in 5 U.S.C. § 706

  15. Section 5596 - Back pay due to unjustified personnel action

    5 U.S.C. § 5596   Cited 494 times
    Authorizing back pay awards to employees “affected by an unjustified or unwarranted personnel action”

  16. Section 5542 - Overtime rates; computation

    5 U.S.C. § 5542   Cited 72 times
    Referring to overtime as "hours of work ... in excess of 40 hours in an administrative workweek"

  17. Section 5584 - Claims for overpayment of pay and allowances, and of travel, transportation and relocation expenses and allowances

    5 U.S.C. § 5584   Cited 13 times

    (a) A claim of the United States against a person arising out of an erroneous payment of pay or allowances made on or after July 1, 1960, or arising out of an erroneous payment of travel, transportation or relocation expenses and allowances, to an employee of an agency, the collection of which would be against equity and good conscience and not in the best interests of the United States, may be waived in whole or in part by- (1) the authorized official; (2) the head of the agency when- (A) the claim