Dupre v. United States

229 Ct. Cl. 706, 1981 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 626
CourtUnited States Court of Claims
DecidedDecember 18, 1981
DocketNo. 683-81C
StatusPublished
Cited by28 cases

This text of 229 Ct. Cl. 706 (Dupre v. United States) 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
Dupre v. United States, 229 Ct. Cl. 706, 1981 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 626 (cc 1981).

Opinion

Court of Claims jurisdiction. — On December 18, 1981 the court entered the following order:

Before Kashiwa, Bennett, and Smith, Judges.

per curiam:

Plaintiff, pro se, claims that Internal Revenue Service agents "did on numerous occasions maliciously, intentionally and wantonly harass and intimidate the plaintiff.” Plaintiff seeks monetary damages in the amount of $18,000,000 for the agents’ alleged violations of the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments to the Constitution.

Plaintiffs petition fails to invoke the jurisdiction of this court. First, this court has no original jurisdiction over tort claims against the United States. 28 U.S.C. § 1491 (1976). Second, the fourth and sixth amendments do not in themselves obligate the United States to pay money damages; and, therefore, we have no jurisdiction over such claims. Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct. Cl. 599, 372 F.2d 1002 (1967).

Finally, while plaintiffs claim under the fifth amendment might be broadly read to refer to the taking clause, the alleged lengthy holding of plaintiffs business records by I.R.S. agents is not a taking of private property for public use which may be compensated for by this court.

it is therefore ordered that the petition is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted by this court.

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

Related

Gibson v. United States
Federal Claims, 2022
Vanover v. United States
Federal Claims, 2021
Meleika v. United States
Federal Claims, 2020
Irizarry v. United States
Federal Claims, 2020
Crosby v. United States
Federal Claims, 2019
Ramirez v. United States
Federal Claims, 2019
Tucker v. United States
Federal Claims, 2019
Croteau v. United States
Federal Claims, 2017
Brown v. United States
Federal Claims, 2017
Jordan v. United States
128 Fed. Cl. 46 (Federal Claims, 2016)
Mercer v. United States
Federal Claims, 2016
Conner v. United States
641 F. App'x 972 (Federal Circuit, 2016)
Mendiola v. United States
124 Fed. Cl. 684 (Federal Claims, 2016)
Nie v. United States
124 Fed. Cl. 334 (Federal Claims, 2015)
Hardin v. United States
123 Fed. Cl. 667 (Federal Claims, 2015)
Alston-Bullock v. United States
122 Fed. Cl. 38 (Federal Claims, 2015)
Baber v. United States
121 Fed. Cl. 807 (Federal Claims, 2015)
Gssime v. United States
Federal Claims, 2014
Hicks v. United States
118 Fed. Cl. 76 (Federal Claims, 2014)
Seals-Bey v. United States
116 Fed. Cl. 120 (Federal Claims, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
229 Ct. Cl. 706, 1981 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 626, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dupre-v-united-states-cc-1981.