Sharrieff

Court of Claims

Sharrieff

503 F.2d 1406, 205 Ct. Cl. 830, 1974 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 45

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedSeptember 20, 1974

DocketNo. 49-74

StatusPublished

This text of 503 F.2d 1406 (Sharrieff) 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

Sharrieff, 503 F.2d 1406, 205 Ct. Cl. 830, 1974 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 45 (cc 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Oou/rt of Claims jurisdiction; limitation of actions.— Plaintiffs seek money damages as a result of the alleged violation of their Fifth Amendment rights to liberty and property. Plaintiffs assert that they are victims of the system of slavery which existed in the United States until its abolition [831]*831in 1865 and, as a result, that they have suffered with respect to their cultural, economic, educational and social development, their deprivation being the result of defendant’s wrongful acts. 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, filed April 29, 1974, for summary judgment. Plaintiffs’ claims are not only barred by the six-year statute of limitations, Japanese War Notes Claimants Ass’n of the Philippines, Inc. v. United States, 178 Ct. Cl. 630, 632, 373 F. 2d 356, 358 (1967); but the claims alleged are not within the general jurisdiction of this court, Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct. Cl. 599, 372 F. 2d 1002 (1967) . Upon consideration of defendant’s motion, together with the response in opposition thereto,

“it is ordered that defendant’s said motion for summary judgment, filed April 29, 1974, be and the same is allowed and plaintiffs’ petition is hereby dismissed.”

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

Oou/rt of Claims jurisdiction; limitation of actions.— Plaintiffs seek money damages as a result of the alleged violation of their Fifth Amendment rights to liberty and property. Plaintiffs assert that they are victims of the system of slavery which existed in the United States until its abolition [831]*831in 1865 and, as a result, that they have suffered with respect to their cultural, economic, educational and social development, their deprivation being the result of defendant’s wrongful acts. 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, filed April 29, 1974, for summary judgment. Plaintiffs’ claims are not only barred by the six-year statute of limitations, Japanese War Notes Claimants Ass’n of the Philippines, Inc. v. United States, 178 Ct. Cl. 630, 632, 373 F. 2d 356, 358 (1967); but the claims alleged are not within the general jurisdiction of this court, Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States, 178 Ct. Cl. 599, 372 F. 2d 1002 (1967) . Upon consideration of defendant’s motion, together with the response in opposition thereto,

“it is ordered that defendant’s said motion for summary judgment, filed April 29, 1974, be and the same is allowed and plaintiffs’ petition is hereby dismissed.”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

503 F.2d 1406, 205 Ct. Cl. 830, 1974 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 45, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sharrieff-cc-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack