equitable tolling – Turtle Talk

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to the following question: Whether the D. C. Circuit misapplied this Court’s Holland decision when it ruled that the Tribe was not entitled to equitable tolling of the statute of limitations for filing of Indian Self-Determination Act claims under the Contract Disputes Act?

Cert stage briefs are here and here.

United States Recommends Certiorari Grant in Menominee Tribe v. United States

June 2, 2015June 2, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the government’s brief:

US cert response brief

An excerpt:

The court of appeals correctly held that neither the Tribe’s erroneous prediction of the outcome of litigation, nor its expectation that the government would deny its administrative claims, warrants equitable tolling of the CDA’s six-year limitations period. That decision, however, squarely conflicts with the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arctic Slope Native Ass’n v. Sebelius, 699 F .3d 1289 (2012), which found tolling appropriate on materially similar facts. In the government’s view, certiorari is warranted.

Cert petition is here.

Lower court materials here.

SCOTUS Holds FTCA’s Time Bars are Subject to Equitable Tolling

April 22, 2015April 22, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in United States v. Kwai Fun Wong. An excerpt:

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA or Act) provides that a tort claim against the United States “shall be forever barred” unless it is presented to the “appropriate Federal agency within two years after such claim accrues” and then brought to federal court “within six months” after the agency acts on the claim. 28 U. S. C. §2401(b). In each of the two cases we resolve here, the claimant missed one of those deadlines, but requested equitable tolling on the ground that she had a good reason for filing late. The Government responded that §2401(b)’s time limits are not subject to tolling because they are jurisdictional restrictions. Today, we reject the Government’s argument and conclude that courts may toll both of the FTCA’s limitations periods.

Menominee Tribe v. United States Cert Petition

November 7, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher3 Comments

Here:

Menominee Indian Tribe Cert Petition

Question presented:

Whether the D.C. Circuit misapplied this Court’s Holland decision when it ruled – in direct conflict with a holding of the Federal Circuit on materially similar facts – that the Tribe did not face an “extraordinary circumstance” warranting equitable tolling of the statute of limitations for filing of Indian Self-Determination Act claims under the Contract Disputes Act?

Lower court materials here.

D.C. Circuit Rules against Menominee Tribe in Equitable Tolling Appeal

September 2, 2014September 2, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the opinion in Menominee Tribe v. United States.

An excerpt:

Delays caused by a party’s inauspicious legal judgments are not “extraordinary circumstance[s]” sufficient to justify equitable tolling. Faced with a variety of reasonable litigation options, the Menominee Tribe chose to wait and see if more favorable law would appear. In so doing, the Tribe allowed its claims to expire. Because we find that no obstacle stood in the Menominee Tribe’s way of bringing the claims within the limitations period, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

D.C. Circuit Rules against Menominee Tribe in Equitable Tolling Appeal

September 2, 2014September 2, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Menominee Tribe v. United States.

An excerpt:

Delays caused by a party’s inauspicious legal judgments are not “extraordinary circumstance[s]” sufficient to justify equitable tolling. Faced with a variety of reasonable litigation options, the Menominee Tribe chose to wait and see if more favorable law would appear. In so doing, the Tribe allowed its claims to expire. Because we find that no obstacle stood in the Menominee Tribe’s way of bringing the claims within the limitations period, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

Like this:

Like this:

Like this:

Like this:

Like this:

Like this:

Like this:

Like this:

Like this:

Like this: