Richard Augustine v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that resolution of factual issues gbing to the merits requires a court to employ the standard applicable to a motion for summary judgment
• stating that the issue of subject-matter jurisdiction may be raised by the parties at any time pursuant to Rule 12(h)(3)
• explaining that jurisdictional analysis is intertwined with the merits when “the question of jurisdiction is dependent on the resolution of factual issues going to the merits”
• reversing a district court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction where the district court declined to hold an evidentiary hearing even though the parties disputed jurisdictional facts
• treating the two-year statute of limitations on FTCA claims in 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b) as jurisdictional and stating that “[i]n this case the determinative jurisdictional facts also go directly to the merits” (emphasis added)
• finding the issue of subject matter jurisdiction properly before the court as a Rule 12(h)(3) motion, despite the government’s framing of the motion as a 12(b)(1) motion, because the motion was made after the government’s responsive pleading

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).