green
Positive treatment
2.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 1983 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1983
2004
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
State of New Mexico v. Donald T. Regan, Etc.
See Alamo Navajo School Board, Inc. v. Andrus 664 F.2d 229, 233 (10th Cir.1981) cert, denied, 456 U.S. 963 , 102 S.Ct. 2041 , 72 L.Ed.2d 487 (1982); B.K Instrument, Inc. v. United States, supra, 715 F.2d at 727 ; Bakersfield City Sch.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Wallace Rogers v. Dwight Ink
Plaintiffs are therefore seeking recovery of at least $228,444. 9 17 Several courts have noted that "when the 'prime objective' or 'essential purpose' of the complaining party is to obtain money from the federal government (in an amount in excess of $10,000), the Claims Court's exclusive jurisdiction is triggered." New Mexico v. Regan, 745 F.2d 1318, 1322 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 2138 , 85 L.Ed.2d 496 (1985); see also Alamo Navajo School Board, Inc. v. Andrus, 664 F.2d 229, 233 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 963 , 102 S.Ct. 2041 , 72 L.Ed.2d 487 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rogers v. Ink
Plaintiffs are therefore seeking recovery of at least $228,444. 9 Several courts have noted that “when the ‘prime objective’ or ‘essential purpose’ of the complaining party is to obtain money from the federal government (in an amount in excess of $10,000), the Claims Court’s exclusive jurisdiction is triggered.” New Mexico v. Regan, 745 F.2d 1318, 1322 (10th Cir.1984), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 105 S.Ct. 2138 , 85 L.Ed.2d 496 (1985); see also Alamo Navajo School Board, Inc. v. Andrus, 664 F.2d 229, 233 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 963 , 102 S.Ct. 2041 , 72 L.Ed.2d 487 …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States of America, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. City of Kansas City, Kansas, Appellee/cross-Appellant
The City’s shift in requested remedies is unavailing, however, because even if characterized as a request for injunctive or declaratory relief, the City’s claim runs afoul of the Tucker Act under this court’s decision in Amalgamated Sugar Co. v. Bergland, 664 F.2d 818, 823-24 (10th Cir. 1981); see also Alamo Navajo School Bd. v. Andrus, 664 F.2d 229, 233 (10th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 963 , 102 S.Ct. 2041 , 72 L.Ed.2d 487 (1982).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Brooksher
v.
Harrel
v.
Harrel
No. 81-6346.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 3, 1982.
Published
C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.