Amoco Production Company v. Donald P. Hodel, Secretary of Department of the Interior, Defendants

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an action is against the United States where it is “against a federal agency . . . and any monetary judgment recovered would expend itself on the public treasury”
• finding that the plaintiffs were, in essence, seeking monetary relief where “money would ‘flow from,’ or be the ‘natural consequence’ of’ a review of agency action
• finding that the plain- tiffs were, in essence, seeking monetary relief where “money would ‘flow from,’ or be the ‘natural consequence’ of” a review of agency action
• construing pleadings that “do not, on their face, ask for a money judgment” and finding that they belong in Claims Court
• “ ‘The Claims Court can issue declaratory relief that is “tied to and subordinate to a monetary award.” ’ ”
• “[I]f we find that this suit falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Claims Court under the Tucker Act, our inquiry will be at an end . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).