28 U.S.C. § 1495
Damages for unjust conviction and imprisonment; claim against United States
The United States Court of Federal Claims shall have jurisdiction to render judgment upon any claim for damages by any person unjustly convicted of an offense against the United States and imprisoned.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 264
cases (74 in the last 5 years), 1951–2026 · leading case: Mhammad Abu-Shawish v. United States, 898 F.3d 726 (7th Cir. 2018).
Mhammad Abu-Shawish v. United States, 898 F.3d 726 (7th Cir. 2018). “He now seeks damages under 28 U.S.C. § 1495 and § 2513 for unjust conviction and imprisonment.”
Zakiya v. United States, 79 Fed. Cl. 231 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “Plaintiff Does Not Meet the Jurisdictional Prerequisite for Suit Brought Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1495 and 2513 Even if the statute of limitations had not run, the court, in the alternative, dismisses plaintiffs Complaint because plaintiff has not alleged facts that, when…”
Humphrey v. United States, 52 Fed. Cl. 593 (Fed. Cl. 2002). “Humphrey”) filed a Complaint against the United States (the “Defendant”) with this Court, seeking relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1495 and 2513 (1994) based upon his claim that he was unjustly convicted of an offense against the United States and illegally incarcerated.”
Nyabwa v. United States, 130 Fed. Cl. 179 (Fed. Cl. 2017). “28 U.S.C. § 1495 ; 28 U.S.C. § 2513 ; Motion to Dismiss; Pro Se.”
Johnson v. United States, 411 F. App'x 303 (Fed. Cir. 2010). “On May 24, 2010, Johnson filed a response to the government’s motion for dismissal, in which he alleged that the Court of Federal Claims had jurisdiction over his complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1495 and 2513. Johnson asked the court to accept his response “as a supplement to…”
Bolduc v. United States, 72 Fed. Cl. 187 (Fed. Cl. 2006). “Plaintiff Frank Bolduc seeks money damages under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1495 and 2513, to compensate him for being unjustly convicted and imprisoned for eight years.”
Xiaoxing Xi v. Andrew Haugen, 68 F.4th 824 (3rd Cir. 2023). “And Congress allowed two such remedies in this context: 28 U.S.C. § 1495 and the Hyde Amendment, 18 U.”
Glidden Co. v. Zdanok, 370 U.S. 530 (1962). “438 , 28 U. S. C. § 1495 , and appellate jurisdiction over tort suits against the United States tried in the District Courts, Act of Aug.”
Sykes v. United States, 105 Fed. Cl. 231 (Fed. Cl. 2012). “Sykes argues that he was wrongfully denied a certificate of innocence and is entitled to such a certificate from this court. See id. ¶ 6; see also Compl.”
United States v. Graham, 608 F.3d 164 (4th Cir. 2010). “See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1495 , 2513 (2006). Concluding that Graham had not met the statutory prerequisites for a certificate of innocence, the district court refused to grant him one.”
United States v. Susan Bala, 948 F.3d 948 (8th Cir. 2020). “See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1495 , 2513. In United States v.”
Phang v. United States, 87 Fed. Cl. 321 (Fed. Cl. 2009). “The court lacks jurisdiction over plaintiffs wrongful conviction or wrongful imprisonment claim alleged under 28 U.S.C. § 1495 because no court has reversed plaintiffs conviction on the grounds of innocence.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.