Background
George McDermott sued the United States in the Court of Federal Claims, alleging breach of contract in connection with what he described as decades of court corruption. He sought restoration of his right to a jury trial, reinstatement of dockets from prior cases, mandamus relief against court officers and agents, and between $30 million and $45 million.
McDermott also characterized his suit as involving denied civil rights, theft of his business and residence, obstruction of justice, and falsification of court records. The Court of Federal Claims dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, finding that he had not alleged or demonstrated a contract with the federal government. After McDermott appealed, the Federal Circuit issued a show-cause order concerning summary disposition.
The Court’s Holding
In a nonprecedential per curiam order, the Federal Circuit summarily affirmed because the jurisdictional dismissal was clearly correct and no substantial question existed regarding the appeal’s outcome. The Tucker Act permits the Court of Federal Claims to hear certain monetary claims against the United States, but it excludes tort claims and requires a money-mandating source of substantive law.
The court held that the Court of Federal Claims could not review decisions from McDermott’s earlier federal-court proceedings. It also lacked jurisdiction over his civil-rights allegations, which Congress assigned to federal district courts, and over claims sounding in tort. McDermott alleged no cognizable contract with the federal government, and his arguments instead amounted to an impermissible collateral attack on prior litigation.
The Federal Circuit denied all pending motions, including McDermott’s motion to strike the show-cause order and his request to let the appeal proceed, and directed each party to bear its own costs.
Key Takeaways
- The Court of Federal Claims cannot review or overturn rulings made in prior federal-court proceedings.
- Labeling allegations as a breach-of-contract claim does not establish Tucker Act jurisdiction without a cognizable contract with the federal government.
- Civil-rights claims and tort claims fall outside the Court of Federal Claims’ jurisdiction.
Why It Matters
The order illustrates the limited jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims. Plaintiffs seeking monetary relief from the United States must identify a valid jurisdictional basis, and they cannot use that court to relitigate adverse decisions from other tribunals.
It also demonstrates that the Federal Circuit may summarily affirm when the lower court’s judgment is so clearly correct that the appeal presents no substantial question.