Holmes

Court of Claims

Holmes

205 Ct. Cl. 836, 1974 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 50, 1974 WL 5630

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedSeptember 20, 1974

DocketNo. 182-74

StatusPublished

This text of 205 Ct. Cl. 836 (Holmes) 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

Holmes, 205 Ct. Cl. 836, 1974 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 50, 1974 WL 5630 (cc 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Gowrt of Claims jurisdiction; tort claim. — On September 20,1974 the court issued the following order:

Before CoweN, Chief Judge, Kashiwa and BeNNEtt, Judges.

“This case comes ‘before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss, filed July 23, 1974. Upon consideration thereof and of plaintiff’s response and of defendant’s response thereto, the court concludes that the motion should be granted because plaintiff’s claim sounds in tort and is not the type of ‘claim against the United States founded * * * upon the Constitution,’ 28 U.S.C. § 1491 (1970), as amended, (Supp. II, 1972), over which this court has jurisdiction, and on the basis thereof,

“it is ordered that defendant’s motion to dismiss is hereby granted and that plaintiff’s petition be and the same is dismissed.”

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

Gowrt of Claims jurisdiction; tort claim. — On September 20,1974 the court issued the following order:

Before CoweN, Chief Judge, Kashiwa and BeNNEtt, Judges.

“This case comes ‘before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss, filed July 23, 1974. Upon consideration thereof and of plaintiff’s response and of defendant’s response thereto, the court concludes that the motion should be granted because plaintiff’s claim sounds in tort and is not the type of ‘claim against the United States founded * * * upon the Constitution,’ 28 U.S.C. § 1491 (1970), as amended, (Supp. II, 1972), over which this court has jurisdiction, and on the basis thereof,

“it is ordered that defendant’s motion to dismiss is hereby granted and that plaintiff’s petition be and the same is dismissed.”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 Ct. Cl. 836, 1974 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 50, 1974 WL 5630, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holmes-cc-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack