Texas Peanut Farmers, Georgia Peanut Farmers, Alabama Peanut Farmers, South Carolina Peanut Farmers, and Florida Peanut Farmers 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 the Court of Federal Claims should have ordered transfer of the case as “absent transfer, applicable statutes of limitations may bar appellant from adjudicating otherwise legitimate claims”
• holding that \Congress may withdraw any grant of Tucker Act jurisdiction\ and the Court of Federal Claims lacks jurisdiction where \Congress has granted district courts exclusive jurisdiction over claims\
• holding that transfer is appropriate under section 163 I when the court finds that there is a want of jurisdiction, the action could have timely been brought in another court, and transfer is in the interest ofjustice
• holding that transfer is appropriate under Section 1631 when the court finds that there is a want of jurisdiction, the action could have timely been brought in another court, and transfer is in the interest of justice
• holding that statute permitting suit “only in the United States district court for the district in which the insured farm is located” specifically requires that suits be brought in the district courts rather than the Court of Federal Claims
• stating that the Court of Federal Claims should consider whether transfer is appropriate once the court has determined that it lacks jurisdiction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).