F.E.B. Corp. v. United States
818 F.3d 681
11th Cir.2016Background
- Wisteria Island, a 39-acre spoil island off Key West, was formed by Navy dredging; substantial fill occurred by 1943.
- In 1951 the United States (Navy) sent a letter to Florida asserting federal ownership of the spoil area, citing an 1819 treaty and later Executive Orders.
- Florida acknowledged the federal claim but sold the island in 1952 via a quitclaim deed; title passed privately and F.E.B. acquired the island in 1967.
- Congress enacted the Submerged Lands Act (SLA) in 1953, granting states title to submerged lands within three miles but excepting, inter alia, lands "filled in, built up, or otherwise reclaimed by the United States for its own use."
- The United States did not press its claim for decades and even licensed Navy training on the island (2004–2006), but reasserted ownership in 2011; F.E.B. sued under the Quiet Title Act (QTA).
- The district court dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, finding the QTA’s 12‑year limitations period had run; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether F.E.B.’s QTA claim accrued in 1951 | The SLA (1953) nullified or reset any earlier federal claim so limitations did not bar suit | The 1951 federal letter put F.E.B.’s predecessors on notice; QTA accrual occurred in 1951 and expired in 1963 | Accrual occurred in 1951; QTA claim barred by the 12‑year limit; dismissal affirmed |
| Whether the SLA effected clear abandonment of federal title | SLA’s grant to states abandoned preexisting federal claims to submerged lands like Wisteria | SLA contains express exceptions (e.g., lands built up by U.S. for its own use), so it did not clearly abandon the federal claim | SLA did not clearly and unequivocally abandon U.S. interest in Wisteria Island; limitations continued running |
| Whether government internal documents or later conduct showed abandonment | Internal memos, letters, and later licensing demonstrate government treated island as state/private and thus abandoned claim | Informal agency materials and subordinate actions cannot effect abandonment without authorized, formal disposition | Informal/subordinate actions insufficient to show abandonment; no binding, authoritative relinquishment found |
| Whether a different federal claim after SLA prevents accrual | F.E.B.: the government’s later legal theory under the SLA is a different claim so clock did not run | U.S.: the asserted interest—ownership of the island—was the same; accrual depends on notice of an adverse interest, not precise legal theory | The nature of the government’s legal theory is irrelevant; notice of an adverse ownership claim triggers accrual |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Mottaz, 476 U.S. 834 (1986) (statutory terms of waiver of sovereign immunity define jurisdictional scope)
- Block v. North Dakota ex rel. Bd. of Univ. & Sch. Lands, 461 U.S. 273 (1983) (QTA provides exclusive remedy and its limitations period is jurisdictional)
- Spirit Lake Tribe v. North Dakota, 262 F.3d 732 (8th Cir. 2001) (government need not give explicit notice; reasonable awareness of adverse claim suffices for accrual)
- Kingman Reef Atoll Invs., LLC v. United States, 541 F.3d 1189 (9th Cir. 2008) (abandonment requires clear, unequivocal act and formal documentation by authorized official)
- Cheyenne Arapaho Tribes v. United States, 558 F.3d 592 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (same standard for abandonment)
- California ex rel. State Lands Comm’n v. United States, 457 U.S. 273 (1982) (SLA exception for lands built up by the United States applies even where accretion was inadvertent)
- United States v. California, 332 U.S. 19 (1947) (prior Supreme Court decision prompting Congressional enactment of the SLA)
- United States v. Kwai Fun Wong, 135 S. Ct. 1625 (2015) (context on when statutory time limits are treated as jurisdictional)
- Knapp v. United States, 636 F.2d 279 (10th Cir. 1980) (knowledge of full contours of claim not required for accrual)