Background
Edward S. McLarnon sued the United States in the Court of Federal Claims. The court previously granted the government’s motion to dismiss his original complaint, while allowing him an opportunity to seek leave to amend to address a breach-of-contract claim.
McLarnon then filed an amended complaint without a separate motion for leave. Judge Stephen S. Schwartz construed the filing as a request for leave to amend. The amended complaint repeatedly alleged that the government breached a contract, but did not set out facts showing that a contract existed or identify the contract provisions on which McLarnon relied.
The Court’s Holding
The court denied leave to amend because amendment would be futile. A valid contract claim against the United States requires allegations supporting mutual intent, consideration, unambiguous offer and acceptance, and actual authority for the government representative to bind the government.
McLarnon’s amended complaint did not plausibly allege those elements. It also failed to comply with RCFC 9(k)’s requirement to identify the substantive contract provisions supporting the claim. Because McLarnon failed to state a claim under any theory within the court’s jurisdiction, the court dismissed the case and directed entry of judgment for the United States.
Key Takeaways
- A plaintiff alleging breach of contract against the United States must plead facts supporting the existence of an enforceable contract.
- Contract claims must identify the substantive provisions allegedly breached, as required by RCFC 9(k).
- The Court of Federal Claims may deny leave to amend when the proposed amendment would be futile.
Why It Matters
The order underscores that labeling a claim as a government contract dispute is not enough to establish Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction. A plaintiff must plead the facts and contractual terms that establish an enforceable agreement with an authorized federal representative.
It also illustrates that an opportunity to amend does not require the court to accept an amended pleading that still fails to state a jurisdictionally cognizable claim.