Free Response - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:98-cv-00483-LMB

Document 244-2

Filed 04/08/2005

Page 1 of 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 THE COURT'S QUESTION: The effect of the assignment of a new judge upon the standards for a motion to reconsider under the U.S. Court of Federal Claims Rule 59. For example, to what extent may a new judge revisit issues; to what extent must a new judge disagree with the prior decision in order to grant a motion to reconsider; and can a new judge decide the issue de novo? . . . . . . . . . . . 2 I. THE LEGAL STANDARDS FOR SEEKING RECONSIDERATION OF A COURT'S OPINION PURSUANT TO RCFC 59 ARE STRICT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 DESPITE THE RESTRICTIONS OF RCFC 59, THIS COURT POSSESSES INHERENT AUTHORITY TO REVISIT ITS OWN DECISIONS PRIOR TO FINAL JUDGMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 A SUCCESSOR TRIAL COURT JUDGE STEPS INTO THE SHOES OF THE ORIGINAL TRIAL COURT JUDGE ASSIGNED TO A CASE AND HAS THE SAME POWER TO REVISIT ISSUES AS THE ORIGINAL TRIAL JUDGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

II.

III.

i

Case 1:98-cv-00483-LMB

Document 244-2

Filed 04/08/2005

Page 2 of 6

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd) PAGE THE COURT'S QUESTION: Legal and policy based reasons the Court should consider in determining which course to follow . . . . . . . . . . 9 I. AS WE DISCUSSED AT THE PARTIES' MARCH 16, 2005 STATUS CONFERENCE, WE DISAGREE WITH JUDGE SYPOLT'S JURISDICTIONAL DECISION, BUT RECOGNIZE THE BENEFITS OF FINALITY THAT APPELLATE REVIEW WOULD PROVIDE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 A. With All Due Respect, We Agree With The Plaintiff That The Trial Court's Jurisdictional Analysis In Its January 31, 2005 Order Is Incorrect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Despite Our Agreement With The Plaintiff Regarding Jurisdiction, It Would Be Beneficial To Obtain Final Resolution Of This Jurisdictional Issue From The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit . . . 13

B.

II.

EVEN THOUGH WE AGREE THAT THIS COURT POSSESSES JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN PLAINTIFF'S CONTRACT CLAIMS, THE RATIONALE THAT OTHER JUDGES OF THIS COURT HAVE USED TO FIND JURISDICTION IS INCORRECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

ii

Case 1:98-cv-00483-LMB

Document 244-2

Filed 04/08/2005

Page 3 of 6

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES PAGE(S)

Alabama Power Co. v. United States Department of Energy, 307 F.3d 1300 (11th Cir. 2002) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Anchor Savings Bank FSB v. United States, 63 Fed. Cl. 6 (2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 4 Boston Edison Co. v. United States, No. 99-447C, 2005 WL 375603 (Fed. Cl. Feb. 15, 2005) (to be published at 64 Fed. Cl. 167) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16, 17, 18 Christopher Village, L.P. v. United States, 360 F.3d 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2004). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 17 Chui v. United States, 948 F.2d 711 (Fed. Cir. 1991) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 8 Consolidated Edison Co. of New York v. Department of Energy, No. 98-1358 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 16, 1999) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 CW Government Travel, Inc. v. United States, 63 Fed. Cl. 459 (2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2, 3 Duszak v. United States, No. 04-5048, 104 Fed. Appx. 738 (Fed. Cir. July 13, 2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Exxon Corp. v. United States, 931 F.2d 874 (Fed. Cir. 1991) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 8 FDIC v. Maco Bancorp, Inc., 125 F.3d 1446 (Fed. Cir. 1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 2 Fru-Con Constr. Corp. v. United States, 44 Fed. Cl. 298 (1999), aff'd, 250 F.3d 762 (Fed. Cir.2000) . . . . . . . . 2, 3, 4 iii

Case 1:98-cv-00483-LMB

Document 244-2

Filed 04/08/2005

Page 4 of 6

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES (cont'd) CASES PAGE(S)

General Elec. Uranium Mgt. Corp. v. United States Dep't of Energy, 764 F.2d 896 (D.C. Cir. 1985) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 16 Henderson County Drainage Dist. No. 3 v. United States, 55 Fed. Cl. 334 (2003) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Independence Park Apts. v. United States, 62 Fed. Cl. 684 (2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Indiana Michigan Power Co. v. Department of Energy, 88 F.3d 1272 (D.C. Cir. 1996) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 18 Iraheta v. United of Omaha Life Ins. Co., No. 2004-794, 2005 WL 701070 (D. Md. Mar. 28, 2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Jamesbury Corp. v. Litton Industries, Prod., Inc., 839 F.2d 1544 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 828 (1988) . . . . . . . . . 6, 8 Northern States Power Company v. United States, 128 F.3d 754 (D.C. Cir. 1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 14 Roche v. District of Columbia, 18 Ct. Cl. 289, 290, 1800 WL 1263 (1883) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Thompson v. Moffitt, No. 102476, 1992 WL 884945 (Va. Cir. Ct. 1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 United States v. O'Keefe, 128 F.3d 885 (5th Cir. 1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Wisconsin Electric Power Co. v. Department of Energy, 626 F. Supp. 424 (D.D.C. 1984), aff'd, 778 F.2d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1985) . . . . . 17

iv

Case 1:98-cv-00483-LMB

Document 244-2

Filed 04/08/2005

Page 5 of 6

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES (cont'd) CASES PAGE(S)

Wisconsin Electric Power Co. v. United States Department of Energy, 778 F.2d 1 (D.C. Cir. 1985) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 16 Yuba Natural Res., Inc. v. United States, 904 F.2d 1577 (Fed. Cir.1990) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 STATUTES 28 U.S.C. § 1292 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1, 2 28 U.S.C. § 1631 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 42 U.S.C. § 10139 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 10 42 U.S.C. § 10222 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 18 MISCELLANOUS Black's Law Dictionary (5th ed. 1979) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Interlocutory Ruling or Order of One Judge as Binding on Another in Same Case, 132 A.L.R. 14 (1941) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Propriety of Federal District Judge's Overruling Or Reconsidering Decision Or Order Previously Made In Same Case By Another District Judge, 20 A.L.R. Fed 13 (1974) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

v

Case 1:98-cv-00483-LMB

Document 244-2

Filed 04/08/2005

Page 6 of 6

INDEX TO APPENDIX DOCUMENT PAGE

Pages from "Brief For The Department Of Energy" in General Electric Uranium Management Corp. v. United States Department of Energy, Nos. 84-5234 & 83-2073 (Aug. 17, 1984) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

vi