Also known as:U.S. Court of Federal Claims · Court of Federal Claims · US Court of Federal Claims · CFC · United States Court of Federal Claims
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A federal court of record established under Article I of the Constitution with sixteen judges appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. The court possesses jurisdiction over monetary claims against the United States arising from contracts, takings, and other specified statutory bases.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
5
Evidence Rules in License Dispute
Frostline Textiles filed a civil action in the United States Court of Federal Claims seeking damages after the denial of a federal banking license. At trial the regulator attempted to introduce transcripts from an earlier administrative hearing conducted without formal evidentiary constraints. The court applied the Federal Rules of Evidence to determine admissibility of the transcripts.
Flooding Takings Claim
Fumiko Fujimoto, owner of timberland along a river, sued the United States in the Court of Federal Claims after repeated seasonal flooding authorized by the Army Corps of Engineers destroyed millions of board feet of timber. The court evaluated whether the temporary but recurring invasions constituted a compensable taking under the Fifth Amendment.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Statutes
Federal Rules
Dictionaries
Arkansas Game and Fish Commission v. United States133 S. Ct. 511, 518 (2012)
Railroad Right-of-Way Dispute
Fernando Farrell, trustee of a revocable trust holding land crossed by an abandoned rail corridor, brought an action in the Court of Federal Claims asserting that the government's conversion of the corridor into a trail effected a taking. The court examined the nature of the original 1875 Act grant to determine whether the United States retained any reversionary interest.
Marvin M. Brandt Revocable Trust, et al. v. United States134 S. Ct. 1257 (2014)
Coal Industry Health Premiums
Fairview Manufacturing challenged in the Court of Federal Claims an assessment of premiums under the Coal Act to fund retiree health benefits. The company argued that the retroactive liability constituted an unconstitutional taking of its property without just compensation.
Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel524 U.S. 498, 557-58 (1998)
Raisin Reserve Requirement
Finn Fletcher, a raisin grower, filed suit in the Court of Federal Claims alleging that a federal marketing order requiring him to surrender a portion of his crop effected a per se physical taking. The court considered whether the compelled transfer of specific property triggered categorical takings analysis.
Horne v. Department of Agriculture576 U.S. 350 (2015)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
Which federal courts are expressly covered by the Federal Rules of Evidence under Rule 1101(a)?+
The Federal Rules of Evidence apply to proceedings in the United States Court of Federal Claims. This coverage extends to both civil and criminal cases in that court.
How many judges serve on the United States Court of Federal Claims?+
Sixteen judges constitute the court. They are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.
To which appellate court do decisions from the United States Court of Federal Claims go?+
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over appeals from the Court of Federal Claims, including certain interlocutory orders.
524 U.S. 498, 557-58 (1998)Constitutional Law
…answer to Eastern's complaint: Whether petitioner's takings claim was properly filed in Federal District Court rather than the United States Court of Federal Claims. See App. (CA1) 40. Although the Commissioner no longer challenges the Court's adjudication of this action, see Brief for Federal Respondent 38-39, n. 30, it is appropriate that we clarify…