U.S. Code » Title 28 » Part PART VI— PARTICULAR PROCEEDINGS › Chapter CHAPTER 165— UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS PROCEDURE

28 U.S.C. § 2502

Aliens’ privilege to sue

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Citizens or subjects of any foreign government which accords to citizens of the United States the right to prosecute claims against their government in its courts may sue the United States in the United States Court of Federal Claims if the subject matter of the suit is otherwise within such court’s jurisdiction.(b) See section 7422(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for exception with respect to suits involving internal revenue taxes.(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 976; Pub. L. 89–713, § 3(b), Nov. 2, 1966, 80 Stat. 1108; Pub. L. 97–164, title I, § 139(a), Apr. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 42; Pub. L. 99–514, § 2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095; Pub. L. 102–572, title IX, § 902(a)(1), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4516.)Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 261 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, § 155, 36 Stat. 1139).

Changes were made in phraseology.

Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 7422(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, referred to in subsec. (b), is classified to section 7422(f) of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code.

Amendments

1992—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 102–572 substituted “United States Court of Federal Claims” for “United States Claims Court”.

1986—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 99–514 substituted “Internal Revenue Code of 1986” for “Internal Revenue Code of 1954”.

1982—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 97–164 substituted “United States Claims Court” for “Court of Claims”.

1966—Pub. L. 89–713 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a) and added subsec. (b).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1992 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 102–572 effective Oct. 29, 1992, see section 911 of Pub. L. 102–572, set out as a note under section 171 of this title.

Effective Date of 1982 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 97–164 effective Oct. 1, 1982, see section 402 of Pub. L. 97–164, set out as a note under section 171 of this title.

Effective Date of 1966 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 89–713 applicable to suits brought against officers, employees, or personal representatives instituted 90 days or more after Nov. 2, 1966, see section 3(d) of Pub. L. 89–713, set out as a note under section 7422 of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 55 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1952–2022 · leading case: Teresa Alen Ferreiro, Dorothy Erasmo Jeffers, & Mario Vazquez Lopez v. United States, 350 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Teresa Alen Ferreiro, Dorothy Erasmo Jeffers, & Mario Vazquez Lopez v. United States, 350 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2003). · cites it 4× “The Court of Federal Claims dismissed the plaintiffs’ action for want of jurisdiction, holding that it did not have subject matter jurisdiction over their complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2502 (a) (the “Reciprocity Act”) even if they were entitled to payment.”
Dethlefs v. United States, 60 Fed. Cl. 810 (Fed. Cl. 2004). · cites it 7× “§§ 1495 , 2513 (2000); and (3) 28 U.S.C. § 2502 (2000), which allows foreign nationals to bring claims against the United States under certain limited circumstances.”
El-Shifa Pharm. Indus. Co. & Salah El Din Ahmed Mohammed Idris v. United States, 378 F.3d 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2004). · cites it 2× “Third, the government argued that the appellants failed to satisfy the specific requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2502 , which limits the jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims over suits brought by aliens to those in which United States citizens enjoy a reciprocal right to sue…”
Mexican Intermodal Equip. S.A. de C.V. v. United States, 61 Fed. Cl. 55 (Fed. Cl. 2004). · cites it 4× “Claims by a Foreign Plaintiff The jurisdiction of this court over claims brought by a foreign plaintiff, such as MIE, is governed by the reciprocity provision in 28 U.S.C. § 2502 (2000). The statute gives the Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction to heai* complaints brought by…”
Benjamin Gal-Or v. United States, 113 Fed. Cl. 540 (Fed. Cl. 2013). · cites it 15× “Whether 28 U.S.C. § 2502 (a) Divests The Court Of Subject Matter Jurisdiction To Adjudicate Plaintiffs’ Claims.”
Mathews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67 (1976). “§ 7435 (a); 28 U. S. C. § 2502 . 13 The classifications among aliens established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, 66 Stat.”
Nat'l Australia Bank v. United States, 55 Fed. Cl. 782 (Fed. Cl. 2003). · cites it 3× “Jurisdiction Defendant asserts that we do not have jurisdiction because the requirements of 28 U.S.C. § 2502 (a) (1994) have not been met.”
Ferreiro v. United States, 54 Fed. Cl. 274 (Fed. Cl. 2002). · cites it 11× “Plaintiffs contend that they are Cuban Nationals who are afforded the privilege to sue the United States pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2502 . They assert that citizens of the United States are afforded reciprocal rights before the courts of the Republic of Cuba equal to those rights…”
Nat'l City Bank of NY v. Repub. of China, 348 U.S. 356 (1955). · cites it 2× “[8] 28 U. S. C. § 2502 . The earliest version of this statute appears in 15 Stat.”
Llamera v. United States, 15 Cl. Ct. 593 (Ct. Cl. 1988). · cites it 3× “Defendant contends that plaintiff has not demonstrated the required reciprocity in Cuban courts and, therefore, has failed to demonstrate that jurisdiction over his claim properly lies in this court.”
El-Shifa Pharm. Indus. Co. v. United States, 55 Fed. Cl. 751 (Fed. Cl. 2003). · cites it 3× “First, it invoked 28 U.S.C. § 2502 (a) (2000). That statute limits a non-citizen litigant’s right to sue in this Court, making it contingent upon an equivalent right of judicial access by American citizens in the courts of the Plaintiff’s country.”
Martin John Beattie v. United States, 756 F.2d 91 (D.C. Cir. 1984). “” In the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2502 (1982), it provided that “[c]itizens or subjects of any foreign government which accords to citizens of the United States the right to prosecute claims against their government in its courts may sue the United States in the Claims Court if…”
Show all 55 citing cases →
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.