Rogers v. United States
95 Fed. Cl. 513
Fed. Cl.2010Background
- Bredas acquired property in Sarasota County on February 18, 2000, identified as Parcel ID 0134-16-0001.
- At the time of the taking on April 2, 2004, the Bredas did not own property abutting or underlying the rail-trail corridor and do not currently own such property.
- Bredas asserted takings claims as members of the Silver Oak Neighborhood Association (Homeowners’ Association).
- Section 7.10 of the Declaration requires three-fourths HOA member approval to sue on behalf of the HOA; no such approval alleged to have been obtained.
- The HOA has not filed a takings claim in this case, and there is no indication the Bredas were authorized to sue on behalf of the HOA.
- The court analyzes standing as a jurisdictional issue and concludes the Bredas lack the necessary property interest and authorization to pursue takings claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do the Bredas have standing to assert takings claims? | Bredas contend their property abuts/underlies the corridor and they may sue on HOA grounds. | Bredas lack abutting/underlying property and HOA authorization; no standing. | Bredas lack standing; claims dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. |
| Has the HOA authorization to sue on its behalf been obtained as required by the Declaration? | Bredas are authorized to sue on behalf of the HOA under the Declaration. | No evidence of the required HOA approval; HOA has not filed a takings claim. | Authorization not shown; standing not established. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (Supreme Court, 1992) (standing requires injury-in-fact, causation, and redressability)
- Reynolds v. Army & Air Force Exchange Serv., 846 F.2d 746 (Federal Circuit, 1988) (jurisdictional facts may be examined on motion to dismiss)
- Moyer v. United States, 190 F.3d 1314 (Fed. Cir., 1999) (permits consideration of extraneous evidence to resolve jurisdictional facts)
- Schultz v. United States, 92 Fed.Cl. 213 (Federal Circuit/United States Court of Federal Claims, 2010) (procedure for evaluating jurisdictional challenges in RCFC motions)
- Weeks Marine, Inc. v. United States, 575 F.3d 1352 (Fed.Cir., 2009) (article I court applies Article III standing standards)