- ___ Fed. App'x ___, 2016 WL 3627055.
- Affirmed dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Claims Court, as a court of limited jurisdiction, correctly held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Fifth Amendment takings claim on the grounds that such a claim would require the Claims Court to review the merits of the bankruptcy and district court's actions, which it had no authority to do. Plaintiff's Fifth Amendment claim was, at its heart, a collateral attack on the judgments of the bankruptcy and district courts in the underlying bankruptcy case. The Claims Court also correctly held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the remaining Due Process, Privileges and Immunities, and equal access to the court claims because they were not based on money-mandating provisions of the U.S. Constitution. Designated nonprecedential pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Rule 32.1.
- Procedural context:
- Appeal from U.S. Court of Federal Claims, of dismissal of claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
- Pro se plaintiff, a former shareholder of a Chapter 11 debtor in an unrelated proceeding, filed suit against the United States government seeking $2 billion in damages. Plaintiff alleged that the actions and decisions of the bankruptcy and district courts in the unrelated Chapter 11 acted as a Fifth Amendment taking of his former shares in the company, violated his due process rights, deprived him of access to the courts in violation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause, and deprived him of his right to "uniform bankruptcy laws" under the U.S. Constitution. Plaintiff further alleged that the bankruptcy court system was an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers.
- Circuit Judges Lourie, Wallach, and Hughes, per curiam.
3201 in the system
1 Being Processed