Burkholder

Court of Claims

Burkholder

119 F. Supp. 743, 128 Ct. Cl. 767, 1954 U.S. Claims LEXIS 2

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedApril 6, 1954

DocketNo. 673-53

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 119 F. Supp. 743 (Burkholder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burkholder, 119 F. Supp. 743, 128 Ct. Cl. 767, 1954 U.S. Claims LEXIS 2 (cc 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

Where the basis of the plaintiff’s suit against" the United States is not stated in the .petition and the defendant moves to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, defendant’s motion is granted and the petition dismissed in an opinion per curiam, ás.follows:

Plaintiff sues “to recover damages for injuries' sustained” to his nervous system from'“direct enemy action” while employed on board the SS. Clyde Austin Dunning during World War II.

Defendant moves to dismiss for lack of

jurisdiction.

The motion must be granted. ” The basis of plaintiff’s spit iS not stated. From the amount claimed- it may be -plaintiff is claiming under, a war risk insurance policy. If so, the district .'court has exclusive jurisdiction, Levine v. United States, 112 C. Cls. 187, cert. den. 336 U. S. 936. Or it may be plaintiff is suing in -.tort.. If. so, we have no original jurisdiction.

At.any rate, no. facts are alleged to show jurisdiction:in this court. Plaintiff’s suit is. accordingly, dismissed.. \

It is so ordered.

In this case plaintiff’s, petition for writ of certiorari, was denied by the Supreme Court May 24, 1954; 37 U. S. 977.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI