United States Court of Federal Claims

Last updated

United States Court of Federal Claims
(Fed. Cl.)
Seal of the United States Court of Federal Claims.svg
Location Howard T. Markey National Courts Building
(Washington, D.C.)
Appeals to Federal Circuit
Established1982 (predecessor court established in 1855)
Authority Article I tribunal
Created by Federal Courts Improvement Act
28 U.S.C.   §§ 1491–1509
Composition method Presidential nomination
with Senate advice and consent
Judges16
Judge term length15 years
Chief Judge Elaine D. Kaplan
www.uscfc.uscourts.gov

The United States Court of Federal Claims (in case citations, Fed. Cl. or C.F.C.) is a United States federal court that hears monetary claims against the U.S. government. It was established by statute in 1982 as the United States Claims Court, and took its current name in 1992. The court is the successor to trial division of the United States Court of Claims, which was established in 1855.

Contents

The courthouse of the Court of Federal Claims is situated in the Howard T. Markey National Courts Building (on Madison Place across from the White House) in Washington, D.C., [1] but, for convenience, cases may be heard elsewhere in the country. [2]

History

United States Court of Federal Claims on Madison Place in Washington, D.C. United States Court of Federal Claims.JPG
United States Court of Federal Claims on Madison Place in Washington, D.C.

Court of Claims (1855–1982)

The court traces its origins directly back to 1855, when Congress established the United States Court of Claims to provide for the determination of private claims against the United States government. The legislation was signed into law on February 24, 1855, by President Franklin Pierce. Throughout its 160-year history, although it has undergone notable changes in name, size, scope of jurisdiction, and procedures, its purpose has remained the same: in this court, the federal government stands as the defendant and may be sued by citizens seeking monetary redress. For this reason, the court has been referred to as the "keeper of the nation's conscience" and "the People's Court".

As originally in 1855, the court lacked the essential judicial power to render final judgments. This oversight was resolved by legislation passed in 1866, in response to President Abraham Lincoln's insistence in his Annual Message to Congress in 1861 that "It is as much the duty of Government to render prompt justice against itself, in favor of citizens, as it is to administer the same, between private individuals."

In 1887, Congress passed the Tucker Act, which significantly expanded the court's jurisdiction to include all claims against the government except tort, equity, and admiralty claims. The court thus today has nationwide jurisdiction over most suits for monetary claims against the government and sits, without a jury, to determine issues of law and fact. The general jurisdiction of the court, described in 28 U.S.C. § 1491, [3] is over claims for just compensation for the taking of private property, refund of federal taxes, military and civilian pay and allowances, and damages for breaches of contracts with the government. The court also possesses jurisdiction over claims for patent and copyright infringement against the United States, as well as over certain suits by Indian tribes.

Additionally, the court has jurisdiction to hear both pre-award and post-award bid protest suits by unsuccessful bidders on government contracts.

A unique aspect of the court's jurisdiction throughout its history has been the authority to act on congressional references of legislative proposals for compensation of individual claims. As eventually codified in 28 U.S.C. § 1492, [4] either House of Congress may refer a bill to the Chief Judge of the court for an investigation and a report to Congress. A judge of the court is assigned to act as the hearing officer and preside over the judicial proceedings. Then a three-judge review panel submits a report to Congress for its consideration and disposition of such claims for compensation.

Befitting its unique role, the court has been located throughout its history in Washington, D.C., in the vicinity of the White House or in the U.S. Capitol Building. It first met in May 1855 at Willard's Hotel. In July of that year, it moved into the Capitol. After briefly using the Supreme Court's chamber in the basement of the Capitol, it then acquired its own rooms there. In 1879, the court obtained space on the ground floor of the Freedman's Bank Building, which stood at the place now occupied by the Treasury Annex, adjacent to the southeast corner of Lafayette Park. Two decades later, in 1899, the court moved to the building formerly occupied by William Corcoran's art collection across Lafayette Park at the intersection of 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue.

It remained there for 65 years. This building was designed by, and is presently named for, the architect James Renwick, who also designed the Smithsonian Institution's Castle on the National Mall and St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York City. When the facilities there were deemed inadequate by the mid-1950s, the court asked Congress for a new location. Eventually, the site at 717 Madison Place, NW, was chosen and the court moved to its present home on August 1, 1967.

The court's original composition of three judges was expanded to five in 1863. They would consider evidence proffered by claimants and weigh testimony taken by permanent or special commissioners employed by the court, who were dispersed across the United States. One of the first commissioners was Benjamin Harrison of Indiana, who would later become president. [5] If oral argument was requested, the five judges would hear the case en banc . Appeal to the Supreme Court was by right if the amount in dispute was over $3,000. The growth in government caused by and coinciding with World War I made the system unworkable, as the number of filed cases increased considerably. In 1925, legislation enacted by Congress at the request of the court created a separate trial division of seven commissioners and elevated the five judges to an appellate role. Initially, the trial commissioners would function as special masters in chancery and conduct formal proceedings either at the court's home in Washington, D.C., or elsewhere in the United States in a court facility amenable to the parties. The trial procedures evolved to resemble a non-jury civil trial in district court.

In 1948, the commissioners were authorized to make recommendations for conclusions of law. The number of commissioners was increased in 1953 to 15. In 1966, Congress provided that there would be seven appellate judges to be appointed by the President with life tenure. In 1973, the title of the commissioners was changed to trial judge and by 1977, the Court of Claims had 16 trial judges who conducted trials of cases in the first instance. Judgments, which are required to be paid out of appropriations by Congress, were originally paid by individual appropriations passed separately or as part of other appropriations bills. In 1955, Congress provided for a standing appropriation for judgments of $100,000 or less. Finally, in 1977, Congress created a permanent, indefinite appropriation for all judgments awarded by the court.

Current institution (since 1982)

The Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982 created the modern court. [6] While the appellate division of the Court of Claims was combined with the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals to comprise the new United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the trial division of the Court of Claims became the United States Claims Court (and in 1992, the name was changed to the United States Court of Federal Claims). [7] Appeals from the Court of Federal Claims are taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and a judgment there is conclusive unless reviewed by the Supreme Court on writ of certiorari. Decisions of the Court of Claims are binding precedent on both its appellate and trial court successors.

The court, as now constituted, consists of 16 judges, appointed by the president and subject to confirmation by the U.S. Senate for terms of 15 years. In addition, judges who have completed their statutory terms of office are authorized to continue to take cases as senior judges of the court. This ongoing tenure serves as a mechanism to ensure judicial impartiality and independence.

In recent years, the court's docket has been increasingly characterized by complex, high-dollar demands, and high-profile cases in such areas as, for example, the savings and loan crisis of the 1980s, the World War II internment of Japanese-Americans, and the federal repository of civilian spent nuclear fuel.

Nevertheless, despite the nature of the claim, the notability of the claimant, or the amount in dispute, the Court of Federal Claims acts as a clearing house when the government must settle with those it has legally wronged. As observed by former Chief Judge Loren A. Smith, the court is the institutional scale that weighs the government's actions against the standard measure of the law and helps make concrete the spirit of the First Amendment's guarantee of the right "to petition the Government for redress of grievances". [8]

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 gave the court the authority to create an Office of Special Masters to receive and hear certain vaccine injury cases, and the jurisdiction to review those cases. [9] This vaccine injury jurisdiction has been enlarged in recent years to encompass claims stemming from a number of additional vaccines, including, for example, varicella, hepatitis B, and influenza.

Though a provision of the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996 gave the Court of Federal Claims and U.S. district courts concurrent jurisdiction over post-award protests, subsequent legislation provided that, as of January 2001, the United States Court of Federal Claims would be the exclusive judicial forum for post-award bid protest litigation.

In 2006, the court rendered judgments in more than 900 cases and awarded $1.8 billion in damages.

Jurisdiction

The court has special jurisdiction, spelled out in 28 U.S.C.   § 1491: it hears claims for monetary damages [10] that arise from the United States Constitution, federal statutes, executive regulations, or an express or implied in fact contract with the United States Government, most notably under the Tucker Act. The court is established pursuant to Congress's authority under Article One of the United States Constitution. The court has concurrent jurisdiction with U.S. district courts, when the claim is for less than $10,000, by the provisions of 28 U.S.C.   § 1346. Claims have a statute of limitations of six years from the time the claim first accrues. [11]

The court has concurrent jurisdiction involving contracts with the federal government, where a contractor has the option of choosing between filing suit with the court or with the agency Board of Contract Appeals. The general rule is that a contractor may either 1) file suit within 90 days with the agency Board of Contract Appeals or 2) file suit within one year with the court. A contractor, however, must choose which forum in which to file; a contractor cannot file suit with both the agency Board and with the court. (However, in a case where a contractor has filed with the Board, and the Government challenges the timeliness of the filing – the 90-day limit is statutory and cannot be extended – the contractor can file with the court within the one-year period to protect its claims.)

Unlike district courts, which generally only have jurisdiction over disputes in their geographic district, the CFC has jurisdiction over disputes wherever they occur in the country. To accommodate litigants, judges on the court may hold trials at local courthouses near where the disputes arise. [2]

All trials at the court are bench trials, without juries. Because the court only hears cases against the Government, the United States is always the defendant in cases before the CFC.

The court receives a variety of claims against the government, including breach of contract claims, illegal exaction claims, takings claims under the 5th Amendment, claims involving military pay, claims for patent and copyright infringement against the government, federal tax refund claims, and protests regarding contract bidding procedures. According to the Court, tax refund suits make up a quarter of the claims brought before it, although the court exercises concurrent jurisdiction with United States district courts in this area.

Orders and judgments from the court are appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which resides in the same building as the CFC.

This court does not have jurisdiction in claims arising under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which are heard in the appropriate venue United States district court, 28 USC § 1346(b)(1), nor judicial review of the decisions of the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Judicial review of those decisions is vested instead in the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, appeals from which are to the Federal Circuit). Certain procedural differences accrue due to the different jurisdiction, e.g., under the FTCA, the statute of limitations runs two years from the date of the tortious occurrence, or six months from the final denial of administrative relief. See: Exhaustion of remedies.

Congressional references

The court also may hear congressional reference cases, which are cases referred to the court by either house of Congress. The judge serving as hearing officer renders a report as to the case's merits, which is reviewed by a panel of judges formed for that purpose. The report is forwarded back to the chamber of Congress requesting it. [12]

Judges

Unlike judges of courts established under Article Three of the United States Constitution, judges on the Court of Federal Claims do not have life tenure (see Article I and Article III tribunals). Instead, they serve for 15-year terms [13] and are eligible for reappointment. The President appoints the judges of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims with the Senate's advice and consent. [14] The judges are removable by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for "incompetency, misconduct, neglect of duty, engaging in the practice of law, or physical or mental disability." [15]

Current composition of the court

As of August 8,2024:

#TitleJudgeDuty stationBornTerm of serviceAppointed by
Active Chief Senior
50Chief Judge Elaine D. Kaplan Washington, D.C. 19552013–present2021–present—
52Judge Richard Hertling Washington, D.C. 19602019–present—— Trump
53Judge Ryan T. Holte Washington, D.C. 19832019–present—— Trump
54Judge David A. Tapp Washington, D.C. 19622019–present—— Trump
55Judge Matthew H. Solomson Washington, D.C. 19742020–present—— Trump
56Judge Eleni M. Roumel Washington, D.C. 19742020–present2020–2021— Trump
57Judge Edward H. Meyers Washington, D.C. 19722020–present—— Trump
58Judge Kathryn C. Davis Washington, D.C. 19782020–present—— Trump
59Judge Zachary Somers Washington, D.C. 19792020–present—— Trump
60Judge Thompson M. Dietz Washington, D.C. 19792020–present—— Trump
61Judge Stephen S. Schwartz Washington, D.C. 19832020–present—— Trump
62Judge Carolyn N. Lerner Washington, D.C. 19652022–present—— Biden
63Judge Armando O. Bonilla Washington, D.C. 19672022–present—— Biden
64Judge Molly Silfen Washington, D.C. 19802023–present—— Biden
65Judge Philip Hadji Washington, D.C. 19812023–present—— Biden
66Judge Robin M. Meriweather Washington, D.C. 19742024–present—— Biden
11Senior Judge John Paul Wiese Washington, D.C. 19341982–2001—2001–present Reagan
15Senior Judge Robert J. Yock inactive19381983–1998—1998–present Reagan
22Senior Judge Moody R. Tidwell III inactive19391983–1998—1998–present Reagan
23Senior Judge Loren A. Smith Washington, D.C. 19441985–20001986–20002000–present Reagan
24Senior Judge Marian Blank Horn Washington, D.C. 1943
  • 1986–2001
  • 2003–2018
—
  • 2001–2003
  • 2018–present
25Senior Judge Eric G. Bruggink Washington, D.C. 19491986–2001—2001–present Reagan
28Senior Judge Bohdan A. Futey inactive19391987–2002—2002–present Reagan
30Senior Judge James T. Turner inactive19381987–2002—2002–present Reagan
32Senior Judge Robert H. Hodges Jr. inactive19441990–2005—2005–present G.H.W. Bush
34Senior Judge Lawrence Baskir inactive19381998–20132000–20022013–present Clinton
36Senior Judge Lynn J. Bush inactive19481998–2013—2013–present Clinton
37Senior Judge Edward J. Damich Washington, D.C. 19481998–20132002–20092013–present
42Senior Judge Charles F. Lettow Washington, D.C. 19412003–2018—2018–present G.W. Bush
45Senior Judge Victor J. Wolski Washington, D.C. 19622003–2018—2018–present G.W. Bush
48Senior Judge Margaret M. Sweeney Washington, D.C. 19552005–20202018–20202020–present

Former judges

#JudgeStateBorn–diedActive service Chief Judge Senior status Appointed byReason for
termination
1 Joseph V. Colaianni MI 1933–20181982–1984 [Note 1] –– Operation of law resignation
2 Lloyd Fletcher DC 1915–19911982 [Note 1] –1982–1991 Operation of law death
3 Kenneth Harkins OH 1921–20091982–1986 [Note 1] –1986–2009 Operation of law death
4 Roald A. Hogenson UT 1913–19871982–1983 [Note 1] –1983–1987 Operation of law death
5 Thomas J. Lydon ME 1927–20121982–1987 [Note 1] –1987–2012 Operation of law death
6 James F. Merow VA 1932–20161982–1998 [Note 1] –1998–2016
death
7 Philip R. Miller NY 1918–19891982–1986 [Note 1] –1986–1989 Operation of law death
8 David Schwartz NY 1916–19891982 [Note 1] –1982–1989 Operation of law death
9 Robert M. M. Seto HI 1936–present1982–1987 [Note 1] –– Operation of law resignation
10 Louis Spector NY 1918–20031982–1983 [Note 1] –1983–1985 Operation of law retirement
12 George Willi DC 1924–20161982 [Note 1] –1982–1985 Operation of law retirement
13 Harry E. Wood DC 1926–20091982–1986 [Note 1] –1986 Operation of law retirement
14 Judith Ann Yannello NY 1943–present1982–1987 [Note 1] –– Operation of law resignation
16 Alex Kozinski DC 1950–present1982–19851982–1985– Reagan resignation
17 Mastin G. White TX 1901–19871982 [Note 2] –1982–1987 [Note 1]
death
18 Reginald W. Gibson IL 1927–20181982–1995—1995–2018 Reagan death
19 Lawrence S. Margolis MD 1935–20171982–1997–1997–2017 Reagan death
20 Haldane Robert Mayer VA 1941–present1982–1987–– Reagan elevation to Fed. Cir.
21 Christine Odell Cook Miller [Note 3] DC 1944–present1982–2013 [Note 4] –2013
retirement
26 John Light Napier SC 1947–present1986–1989–– Reagan resignation
27 Wilkes C. Robinson KS 1925–20151987–1997–1997–2015 Reagan death
29 Roger Andewelt DC 1946–20011987–2001–– Reagan death
31 Randall Ray Rader VA 1949–present1988–1990–– Reagan elevation to Fed. Cir.
33 Diane Gilbert Sypolt DC 1947–present1990–2005–2005 G.H.W. Bush retirement
35 Emily C. Hewitt MA 1944–present1998–20132009–2013–
retirement
39 Francis Allegra VA 1957–20151998–2013–2013–2015 Clinton death
38 Nancy B. Firestone DC 1951–20221998–2013—2013–2022 Clinton death
40 Sarah L. Wilson MD 1959–present2001–2002 [Note 5] –– Clinton not confirmed
41 Lawrence J. Block VA 1951–present2002–2016–– G.W. Bush retirement
43 Susan G. Braden DC 1948–present2003–20182017–20182018–2019
retirement
44 Mary Ellen Coster Williams MD 1953–present2003–2018—2018–2023 G.W. Bush retirement
46 George W. Miller VA 1941–20162003–2013–– G.W. Bush retirement
47 Thomas C. Wheeler MD 1948–present2005–2020—— G.W. Bush retirement
49 Patricia E. Campbell-Smith DC 1966–present2013–20232013–2017– Obama retirement
51 Lydia Griggsby MD 1968–present2014–2021–– Obama elevation to D. Md
  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Reassigned from the Court of Claims.
  2. ↑ Judge White was reappointed from senior service to active service in 1982 by Reagan via a recess appointment; however he assumed senior status on November 19, 1982, prior to being formally nominated.
  3. ↑ Served as Christine Cook Nettesheim from December 10, 1982, until September 10, 1994.
  4. ↑ Second appointment was a recess appointment; formally nominated on January 29, 1998, confirmed by the Senate on February 3, 1998, and received commission on February 4, 1998.
  5. ↑ Recess appointment; the Senate later rejected the appointment.

Chief judges

Chief Judge
Kozinski 1982–1985
Smith 1986–2000
Baskir 2000–2002
Damich 2002–2009
Hewitt 2009–2013
Campbell-Smith 2013–2017
Braden 2017–2018
Sweeney 2018–2020
Roumel 2020–2021
Kaplan 2021–present

Succession of seats

See also

Related Research Articles

In the United States, a state court has jurisdiction over disputes with some connection to a U.S. state. State courts handle the vast majority of civil and criminal cases in the United States; the United States federal courts are far smaller in terms of both personnel and caseload, and handle different types of cases. States often provide their trial courts with general jurisdiction and state trial courts regularly have concurrent jurisdiction with federal courts. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and their subject-matter jurisdiction arises only under federal law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States courts of appeals</span> Post-1891 U.S. appellate circuit courts

The United States courts of appeals are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal judiciary. They hear appeals of cases from the United States district courts and some U.S. administrative agencies, and their decisions can be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. The courts of appeals are divided into 13 "Circuits". Eleven of the circuits are numbered "First" through "Eleventh" and cover geographic areas of the United States and hear appeals from the U.S. district courts within their borders. The District of Columbia Circuit covers only Washington, DC. The Federal Circuit hears appeals from federal courts across the entire United States in cases involving certain specialized areas of law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States district court</span> Trial court of the U.S. federal judiciary

The United States district courts are the trial courts of the U.S. federal judiciary. There is one district court for each federal judicial district. Each district covers one U.S. state or a portion of a state. There is at least one federal courthouse in each district, and many districts have more than one. District court decisions are appealed to the U.S. court of appeals for the circuit in which they reside, except for certain specialized cases that are appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the United States, a federal judge is a judge who serves on a court established under Article Three of the U.S. Constitution. Often called "Article III judges", federal judges include the chief justice and associate justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, circuit judges of the U.S. Courts of Appeals, district judges of the U.S. District Courts, and judges of the U.S. Court of International Trade.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit</span> Current United States federal appellate court

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is one of the 13 United States courts of appeals. It has appellate jurisdiction over certain categories of specialized cases in the U.S. federal court system. Specifically, it has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal cases involving patents, trademark registrations, government contracts, veterans' benefits, public safety officers' benefits, federal employees' benefits, and various other types of cases. The Federal Circuit has no jurisdiction over criminal, bankruptcy, immigration, or U.S. state law cases. It is headquartered at the Howard T. Markey National Courts Building in Washington, DC.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Tax Court</span> United States federal tribunal dealing with tax matters

The United States Tax Court is a federal trial court of record established by Congress under Article I of the U.S. Constitution, section 8 of which provides that the Congress has the power to "constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court". The Tax Court specializes in adjudicating disputes over federal income tax, generally prior to the time at which formal tax assessments are made by the Internal Revenue Service.

Title 28 is the portion of the United States Code that governs the federal judicial system.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tucker Act</span> 1887 U.S. federal statute

The Tucker Act is a federal statute of the United States by which the United States government has waived its sovereign immunity with respect to certain lawsuits.

Northern Pipeline Construction Company v. Marathon Pipe Line Company, 458 U.S. 50 (1982), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Article III jurisdiction could not be conferred on non-Article III courts.

Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States extensively refined the abstention doctrine to prevent duplicative litigation between state and federal courts.

Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court decision involving Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which provides a private cause of action to victims of employment discrimination. The Court ruled that Title VII's "employee-numerosity requirement," which limits potential defendants to those maintaining at least fifteen employees, is not a limit on a court's jurisdiction to hear Title VII claims. The requirement is instead a substantive element of a Title VII claim, which means that a defendant must raise the issue prior to verdict or the requirement will be waived.

Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Schor, 478 U.S. 833 (1986), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held an administrative agency may, in some cases, exert jurisdiction over state-law counterclaims.

The Civilian Board of Contract Appeals (CBCA) is an adjudicative board composed of federal administrative judges that is housed within but functionally independent of the General Services Administration. The Civilian Board of Contract Appeals was established by Section 847 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, with an effective date of January 6, 2007, to hear and decide contract disputes between Government contractors and Executive agencies under the provisions of the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101 et seq., and regulations and rules issued under that statute.

The Court of Claims was a federal court that heard claims against the United States government. It was established in 1855, renamed in 1948 to the United States Court of Claims, and abolished in 1982. Then, its jurisdiction was assumed by the newly created United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and United States Claims Court, which was later renamed the Court of Federal Claims.

In United States law, jurisdiction-stripping is the limiting or reducing of a court's jurisdiction by Congress through its constitutional authority to determine the jurisdiction of federal courts and to exclude or remove federal cases from state courts.

Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61 (1996), held that federal jurisdiction predicated on diversity of citizenship can be sustained even if there did not exist complete diversity at the time of removal to federal court, so long as complete diversity exists at the time the district court enters judgment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States magistrate judge</span> Judges appointed to assist at US federal district courts

In United States federal courts, magistrate judges are judges appointed to assist U.S. district court judges in the performance of their duties. Magistrate judges generally oversee first appearances of criminal defendants, set bail, and conduct other administrative duties. The position of magistrate judge or magistrate also exists in some unrelated state courts .

<i>Schillinger v. United States</i> 1894 United States Supreme Court case

Schillinger v. United States, 155 U.S. 163 (1894), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court, holding that a suit for patent infringement cannot be entertained against the United States, because patent infringement is a tort and the United States has not waived sovereign immunity for intentional torts.

United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Company, 384 U.S. 394 (1966), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "(w)hen an administrative agency is acting in a judicial capacity and resolves disputed issues of fact properly before it which the parties have had an adequate opportunity to litigate, the courts have not hesitated to apply res judicata to enforce repose." Utah Construction established a two-part test to determine whether res judicata effect should be given to an administrative determination. First, the agency proceeding must be examined to determine whether the agency was "acting in a judicial capacity" and whether the parties had "an adequate opportunity to litigate" the issues before the agency. Second, the general rules of res judicata must be applied to the case. Not all administrative adjudications, and not all judicial determinations, are entitled to res judicata effect. For the principles of res judicata to apply, administrative determinations, like court judgments, must be valid, final and on the merits.

The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) is an administrative tribunal within the United States Federal Government that hears certain claims arising from contract disputes between government contractors and either the Department of Defense or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The ASBCA was established in 1949 by the merger of the Navy Compensation Board, which had been established during World War I, and the War Department Board of Contract Appeals, which had been established in World War I, dissolved after the war, and reestablished in 1942 to deal with contract disputes arising out of World War II. From 1949 to 1962, the board had separate panels for Army, Navy, and Air Force disputes, which were merged into a single combined board in 1962.

References

  1. ↑ United States Court of Federal Claims
  2. 1 2 28 USC § 2505: "Any judge of the United States Court of Federal Claims may sit at any place within the United States to take evidence and enter judgment".
  3. ↑ 28 U.S.C.   § 1491
  4. ↑ 28 U.S.C.   § 1492
  5. ↑ Cowen, Wilson; Philip Nichols, Jr.; Marion T. Bennett (1978). The United States Court of Claims: A History; Part II: Origin, Development, Jurisdiction, 1855–1978. Washington, D.C.: Committee on the Bicentennial of Independence and the Constitution of the Judicial Conference of the United States. p. 92.
  6. ↑ (§105, §165 & §167, Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982, P.L. 97-164, 96  Stat.   25, 50).
  7. ↑ "Court History Brochure" (PDF).
  8. ↑ "United States Court of Federal Claims: The People's Court" (PDF). United States Court of Federal Claims Bar Association. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 16, 2008. Retrieved June 12, 2008.
  9. ↑ 42 U.S.C.   § 300aa-12
  10. ↑ Gregory Sisk, Michael F. Noone, Litigation with the Federal Government (2006), p. 246: "Even today, the traditional money claim under the Tucker Act remains the grist for the Court of Federal Claims mill. The Court of Federal Claims does not have general authority to grant equitable remedies, such as injunctions or specific performance in contract".
  11. ↑ 28 U.S.C.   § 2501
  12. ↑ 28 U.S.C.   § 1492, 28 U.S.C.   § 2509
  13. ↑ 28 U.S.C.   § 172
  14. ↑ 28 U.S.C.   § 171
  15. ↑ 28 U.S.C.   § 176(a)

Bibliography

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.