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

28 U.S.C. § 2507

Calls and discovery

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) The United States Court of Federal Claims may call upon any department or agency of the United States or upon any party for any information or papers, not privileged, for purposes of discovery or for use as evidence. The head of any department or agency may refuse to comply with a call issued pursuant to this subsection when, in his opinion, compliance will be injurious to the public interest.(b) Without limitation on account of anything contained in subsection (a) of this section, the court may, in accordance with its rules, provide additional means for the discovery of any relevant facts, books, papers, documents or tangible things, not privileged.(c) The Court of Federal Claims may use all recorded and printed reports made by the committees of the Senate or House of Representatives.(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 977; Sept. 3, 1954, ch. 1263, § 55(a)–(c), 68 Stat. 1247; Pub. L. 97–164, title I, § 139(f), Apr. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 42; Pub. L. 102–572, title IX, § 902(a), Oct. 29, 1992, 106 Stat. 4516.)Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 272 (Mar. 3, 1911, ch. 231, § 164, 36 Stat. 1140).

Words “or agency” were added. (See reviser’s note under section 1345 of this title.)

Changes were made in phraseology.

Editorial NotesAmendments

1992—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 102–572, § 902(a)(1), substituted “United States Court of Federal Claims” for “United States Claims Court”.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 102–572, § 902(a)(2), substituted “Court of Federal Claims” for “Claims Court”.

1982—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 97–164, § 139(f)(1), substituted “United States Claims Court” for “Court of Claims”.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 97–164, § 139(f)(2), substituted “Claims Court” for “Court of Claims”.

1954—Act Sept. 3, 1954, substituted “Calls and discovery” for “Calls on departments for information” in section catchline, designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), and added subsecs. (b) and (c).

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.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1958–2023 · leading case: Wolfchild v. United States, 68 Fed. Cl. 779 (Fed. Cl. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wolfchild v. United States, 68 Fed. Cl. 779 (Fed. Cl. 2005). · cites it 3× “The government objects to any such requirement, and it particularly resists any reliance by this court on the “Call Statute,” 28 U.S.C. § 2507 , arguing that the grant of authority to this court under that statute has been largely superseded by adoption of discovery procedures.”
Yates v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 1074 (2015). “§ 668 (a)(1)(D)(defining "museum" as entity that owns "tangible objects that are exhibited to the public"); 28 U.S.C. § 2507 (b)(allowing discovery of "relevant facts, books, papers, documents or tangible things").”
Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp. v. United States, 157 F. Supp. 939 (Ct. Cl. 1958). · cites it 3× “The decision establishes that if a plaintiff proceeds under our Call Rule 27 he may be refused discovery if the head of the department or agency deems compliance “injurious to the public interest” under 28 U.S.C. § 2507 (a), footnote 2, supra. On the other hand, if a plaintiff,…”
Muse v. United States, 21 Cl. Ct. 592 (Ct. Cl. 1990). · cites it 3× “Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2507 (a) 29 and RUSCC 34(d), 30 the Secretary of the Army shall calculate the amount of any and all back pay and other benefits to which CPT Muse is entitled consistent with this opinion from the date of his involuntary discharge on September 30, 1983 to…”
Ulmet v. United States, 17 Cl. Ct. 679 (Ct. Cl. 1989). · cites it 2× “” On October 16, 1987, the defendant filed its response to the plaintiff’s October 6, 1987 filing and requested the court to issue a “Call” to the Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2507 (1982). In response to the plaintiff’s claim that…”
Ulmet v. United States, 19 Cl. Ct. 527 (Ct. Cl. 1990). · cites it 2× “*530 First, since a calculation would be required from the Department of the Army to help determine the precise amounts to which the plaintiff is entitled, the court issued a “Call” to the defendant, addressed to the Secretary of the Army, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2507 (a)(1982),…”
Rogers v. United States, 24 Cl. Ct. 676 (Ct. Cl. 1991). · cites it 2× “28 U.S.C. § 2507 (a) provides as follows: The United States Claims Court may call upon any department or agency of the United States or upon any party for any information or papers, not privileged, .”
Rogers v. United States, 26 Cl. Ct. 1023 (Ct. Cl. 1992). · cites it 3× “, December 16,1982, to the last day of the month in which said calculations are made” was corrected to read— “Finally, and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2507 (a)31 and RUSCC 34(d) call,32 the Secretary of the Army shall calculate the amount of any and all back pay and other benefits…”
Palmer v. United States, 38 Fed. Cl. 316 (Fed. Cl. 1997). · cites it 2× “Defendant filed what was purported to be the ABCMR administrative record on September 22,1992, that contained 502 pages; on defendant’s request, a call pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2507 was issued to the Secretary of the Army on February 23, 1993.”
Wolfchild v. United States, 72 Fed. Cl. 511 (Fed. Cl. 2006). “Moreover, acting pursuant to the “Call Statute,” 28 U.S.C. § 2507 , the court required the government to provide a listing of those lineal descendants known to the government.”
Quality Transp. Servs., Inc. v. United States, 12 Cl. Ct. 276 (Ct. Cl. 1987). “The authority underlying this order is set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2507 (a) (1982), which provides in full: The United States Claims Court may call upon any department or agency of the United States or upon any party for any information or papers, not privileged, for purposes of…”
Tucker v. United States, 8 Cl. Ct. 575 (Ct. Cl. 1985). “In view of these findings, the court issued a Call on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), pursuant to RUSCC 34(d)(1)(B) and 28 U.S.C. § 2507 (a), for a calculation of the precise taxes, interest, and penalties for which the plaintiff is obligated regarding each of the taxable…”
Show all 25 citing cases →
— 28 U.S.C. § 2507(b) — 1 case
Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp. v. United States, 157 F. Supp. 939 (Ct. Cl. 1958). “The decision establishes that if a plaintiff proceeds under our Call Rule 27 he may be refused discovery if the head of the department or agency deems compliance “injurious to the public interest” under 28 U.S.C. § 2507 (a), footnote 2, supra. On the other hand, if a plaintiff,…”
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.