Perry v. United States
548 F. App'x 614
Fed. Cir.2013Background
- Perry seeks review of a Court of Federal Claims dismissal for failing to comply with a district court pre-filing injunction.
- The district court in San Diego issued a pre-filing injunction in 2011 prohibiting new federal filings unless terms were met.
- Perry filed a VRRA-related complaint in the Court of Federal Claims on August 20, 2012, alleging takings and related relief against the County of San Diego and related entities.
- The Court of Federal Claims dismissed, finding the injunction extended to Perry’s case and that he violated its terms; it also found lack of jurisdiction alternative grounds if the injunction did not bar the suit.
- On appeal, Perry argued the district court lacked authority to issue the injunction and sought collateral attack, which the court rejected, affirming dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal was proper for violation of the pre-filing injunction | Perry contends district injunction issues/validity are open to challenge | Injunction valid and extended to this case; Perry violated its terms | Yes; dismissal affirmed for violation of the injunction |
| Whether Perry may collaterally attack the district court's injunction in CFC proceedings | Perry challenges validity of the injunction in the CFC | Collateral attack barred; proper remedy is direct appeal | Yes; collateral challenge rejected; affirmed dismissal on that basis |
Key Cases Cited
- Chicot Cnty. Drainage Dist. v. Baxter State Bank, 308 U.S. 371 (1939) (collateral attacks on injunctive orders not permitted in collateral proceedings)
- Ullman v. United States, 64 F. Cl. 557 (2005) (appeal, not collateral attack, for errors in injunctions)
- Martin-Trigona v. Shaw, 986 F.2d 1384 (11th Cir. 1993) (enforcement of pre-filing injunctions to curb abusive litigation)
- Claude E. Atkins Enters., Inc. v. United States, 899 F.2d 1180 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (standard of review for abuse of discretion in pre-filing injunction cases)
- Chicot Cnty. Drainage Dist. v. Baxter State Bank, 308 U.S. 371 (Supreme Court) (principles governing challenges to injunctions)
- Dantzler v. United States Equal Emp’t Opportunity Comm’n, 810 F. Supp. 2d 312 (D.D.C. 2011) (courts may dismiss vexatious litigants for injunction violations)