Emory v. U.S. Attorney General Federal Prison System

Court of Claims

Emory v. U.S. Attorney General Federal Prison System

231 Ct. Cl. 887, 1982 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 404, 1982 WL 25793

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedAugust 13, 1982

DocketNo. 373-82C

StatusPublished

This text of 231 Ct. Cl. 887 (Emory v. U.S. Attorney General Federal Prison System) 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

Emory v. U.S. Attorney General Federal Prison System, 231 Ct. Cl. 887, 1982 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 404, 1982 WL 25793 (cc 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiffs petition claims damages against the Attorney General and the Federal Prison System. He charges that they denied him due process by certain administrative actions relating to his work assignment as a federal prisoner. He asks for legal fees and damages for emotional and psychological stress and for punitive damages.

This court has no jurisdiction of the claim. The relevant jurisdictional statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1491, gives the court jurisdiction of certain claims against the United States, which is not the named defendant. The statute bars tort claims such as this even when the defendant is correctly identified.

It is therefore ordered that the petition is dismissed.

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

Plaintiffs petition claims damages against the Attorney General and the Federal Prison System. He charges that they denied him due process by certain administrative actions relating to his work assignment as a federal prisoner. He asks for legal fees and damages for emotional and psychological stress and for punitive damages.

This court has no jurisdiction of the claim. The relevant jurisdictional statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1491, gives the court jurisdiction of certain claims against the United States, which is not the named defendant. The statute bars tort claims such as this even when the defendant is correctly identified.

It is therefore ordered that the petition is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

231 Ct. Cl. 887, 1982 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 404, 1982 WL 25793, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/emory-v-us-attorney-general-federal-prison-system-cc-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack