97 Fed. Cl. 809
Fed. Cl.2011Background
- Plaintiff Parkwood entered a 515 Program loan with FmHA to develop Parkwood Apartments.
- Loan allowed prepayment at any time; ELIHPA later repealed prepayment rights for older loans.
- Plaintiff made 1992 prepayment requests; FmHA delayed and did not respond.
- Plaintiff renewed prepayment request in 2003; agency offered incentives with restrictive-use terms.
- Plaintiff accepted incentives in 2003, but later rejected incentives in 2005 and sought prepayment again.
- In 2006–2007, FmHA imposed restrictive-use provisions; plaintiff prepaid in 2007 and suit followed in 2007.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did plaintiff’s contract claim accrue? | Accrual in 2003 or 2005, not 1992. | Accrual in 1992, six-year limit barred. | Accrual issues resolved in plaintiff’s favor? (court held timeliness unfavorable to plaintiff) |
| Does the continuing claims doctrine apply to the 1992 prepayment requests? | Late 1992 requests did not trigger breach; ongoing denial creates new claim. | No second breach; continuing claims doctrine does not apply. | Court rejects continuing claims; no new timely claim. |
| Did Franconia Associates’ framework govern accrual here? | Treat ELIHPA repudiation as ongoing breach if timely prepay. | Franconia supports accrual timing based on breach or performance due. | Franconia controls; accrual timed to early 1990s breach. |
| Are takings claims timely under 28 U.S.C. § 2501? | Takings accrue with government’s action in 1992/1993, not 2007. | Takings accrual follows contract breach; same six-year period applies. | Takings claim barred as time-barred. |
Key Cases Cited
- Franconia Associates v. United States, 536 U.S. 129 (U.S. 2002) (repudiation vs. present breach; accrual depends on election to treat repudiation)
- Tamerlane, Ltd. v. United States, 550 F.3d 1135 (Fed.Cir. 2008) (rejects extended-period breach; single breach doctrine; accrual timing)
- City Line Joint Venture v. United States, 82 Fed.Cl. 312 (Fed.Cl. 2008) (HUD prepayment rejection constitutes breach; accrual timing)
- Brown Park Estates-Fairfield Dev. Co. v. United States, 127 F.3d 1457 (Fed.Cir. 1997) (continuing claims doctrine limits when single breach)
- Ariadne Fin. Servs. Pty. Ltd. v. United States, 133 F.3d 874 (Fed.Cir. 1998) (continuing claims doctrine and accrual principles for ongoing benefits)