Taylor v. United States
590 F. App'x 983
Fed. Cir.2014Background
- Taylor, an IRS computer specialist, was removed in April 2011 for adherence failures and unapproved absences.
- She appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board, which dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and failure to exhaust remedies.
- Taylor then challenged the Board’s decision in this court on the theory of retaliatory action for whistleblowing.
- In July 2013, Taylor filed suit in the Court of Federal Claims seeking injunctive, declaratory, and monetary relief against the United States and EEOC officials.
- The Court of Federal Claims dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over negligence, due process, and takings claims, and the appellate court affirmed.
- The court held the constitutional provisions cited do not mandate monetary payment and the Tucker Act does not authorize negligence claims
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CFC had jurisdiction over due process claims for denial of counsel | Taylor lacked counsel and asserts due process right to money damages | Taylor's due process claims are not money-mandating under Fifth/Fourteenth Amendments | No jurisdiction; due process claims not money damages under Tucker Act |
| Whether Fifth Amendment takings claim is viable | Government deprived her of funds to assign counsel constitutes taking | No cognizable property interest and no taking | No viable takings claim; lacks cognizable property interest |
| Whether First Amendment claims provide jurisdiction for damages | First Amendment violations entitle damages against government | First Amendment claims do not provide a monetary remedy absent other jurisdictional basis | Not actionable for money damages under Tucker Act |
| Whether negligence claims fall within Tucker Act jurisdiction | Government negligence in appointing counsel caused damages | Negligence sounds in tort and is excluded by Tucker Act | No jurisdiction; Tucker Act excludes tort claims |
Key Cases Cited
- LeBlanc v. United States, 50 F.3d 1025 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (Due process and equal protection do not mandate monetary payment)
- Crocker v. United States, 125 F.3d 1475 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ((no monetary relief under due process))
- Carruth v. United States, 627 F.2d 1068 (Fed. Cir. 1980) (limits on constitutional remedies for damages)
- United States v. Connolly, 716 F.2d 882 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (First Amendment damages absent other jurisdictional basis)
- Rick's Mushroom Serv., Inc. v. United States, 521 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (torts and federal suits; Tucker Act limitations)
- Keene Corp. v. United States, 508 U.S. 200 (1993) (tort claims excluded from Tucker Act jurisdiction)
- Adams v. United States, 391 F.3d 1212 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (takings claims require cognizable property interests)
- United States v. Navajo Nation, 556 U.S. 287 (2009) (Tucker Act jurisdiction requires substantive right to money damages)
- Testan v. United States, 424 U.S. 392 (1981) (Tucker Act jurisdiction and available remedies)