U.S. Code » Title 38 » Part PART II— GENERAL BENEFITS › Chapter CHAPTER 24— NATIONAL CEMETERIES AND MEMORIALS

38 U.S.C. § 2412

Lease of land and buildings

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 38 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Lease Authorized.—The Secretary may lease any undeveloped land and unused or underutilized buildings, or parts or parcels thereof, belonging to the United States and part of the National Cemetery Administration.(b)Term.—The term of a lease under subsection (a) may not exceed 10 years.(c)Lease to Public or Nonprofit Organizations.—(1) A lease under subsection (a) to any public or nonprofit organization may be made without regard to the provisions of section 3709 of the Revised Statutes (41 U.S.C. 5).11 See References in Text note below.(2) Notwithstanding section 1302 of title 40 or any other provision of law, a lease under subsection (a) to any public or nonprofit organization may provide for the maintenance, protection, or restoration of the leased property by the lessee, as a part or all of the consideration for the lease.(d)Notice.—Before entering into a lease under subsection (a), the Secretary shall give appropriate public notice of the intention of the Secretary to enter into the lease in a newspaper of general circulation in the community in which the lands or buildings concerned are located.(e)National Cemetery Administration Facilities Operation Fund.—(1) There is established on the book of the Treasury an account to be known as the “National Cemetery Administration Facilities Operation Fund” (in this section referred to as the “Fund”).(2) The Fund shall consist of the following:(A) Proceeds from the lease of land or buildings under this section.(B) Proceeds of agricultural licenses of lands of the National Cemetery Administration.(C) Any other amounts appropriated to or otherwise authorized for deposit in the Fund by law.(3) Amounts in the Fund shall be available to cover costs incurred by the National Cemetery Administration in the operation and maintenance of property of the Administration.(4) Amounts in the Fund shall remain available until expended.(Added Pub. L. 108–454, title VI, § 602(a), Dec. 10, 2004, 118 Stat. 3623.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 3709 of the Revised Statutes, referred to in subsec. (c)(1), was classified to section 5 of former Title 41, Public Contracts, and was repealed and restated in section 6101 of Title 41, Public Contracts, by Pub. L. 111–350, §§ 3, 7(b), Jan. 4, 2011, 124 Stat. 3677, 3855.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2021 · leading case: Barrera v. West, 13 Vet. App. 418 (Vet. App. 2000).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Barrera v. West, 13 Vet. App. 418 (Vet. App. 2000). · cites it 8× “6 The position of the Secretary not having been substantially justified, the Court should thus have found that an award of some amount of fees and expenses was warranted pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(1)(A) for the representation provided in the Federal Circuit, and should…”
Karen Gordon v. James B. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 265 (Vet. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “29, 1992) (amending section 2412(d)(2)(f) to add the Court to EAJA's definition of "court"); see generally 38 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(1)(A), (1)(B), (2)(B); Scarborough v.”
Ozer v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 475 (Vet. App. 2002). “38 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(1)(A). For the reasons that follow, the Court will deny the appellant's application.”
Swiney v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 65 (Vet. App. 2000). “" 38 U.S.C. § 2412 (d)(1)(A). "'Special circumstances' is an affirmative defense as to which the government bears the burden of raising and demonstrating that such special circumstances militate against an EAJA award.”
Cooper v. Barnhart, 345 F. Supp. 2d 1309 (S.D. Ala. 2004). · cites it 2× “§ 405 (g), to the Social Security Administration for further proceedings consistent with the Commissioner’s Motion to Remand and the opinion of this court, with instructions to the Appeals Council to reassign this case to a different ALJ.”
Ali v. Gonzales, 486 F. Supp. 2d 1197 (W.D. Wash. 2007). “The Government never maintained that an EAJA award was inappropriate because its position was substantially justified (one of the grounds for denial of an EAJA attorney fee award), and Petitioners never sought any fees for work done on this case beyond January 31, 2003. Analysis…”
Robinson v. Saul (N.D. Cal. 2021). “summarily requests in her motion and reply that the Court award her attorney’s fees 97 || pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act, 38 U.S.C. § 2412 (d), without any explanation in either brief as to why such relief is warranted.”
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.