Background
Plaintiffs David Horowitz and Colleen Lasham, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims alleging that the United States and the State of Hawaii breached fiduciary duties regarding a foreign situs express trust. They sought declaratory relief and an order recognizing them as the trust’s rightful representatives. The Claims Court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, finding no money-mandating basis for relief and noting the court could not hear claims against state officials or individuals.
The court’s reasoning
The Federal Circuit reviewed the jurisdictional challenge de novo. The court explained that the Tucker Act waives sovereign immunity only for claims founded on the Constitution, statutes, regulations, or contracts that mandate monetary damages. It does not grant jurisdiction for equitable relief. The plaintiffs sought only equitable relief and failed to point to any statute or contract that established a fiduciary relationship mandating compensation. The court also rejected the argument that the plaintiffs should have been allowed to amend their complaint, noting they did not request leave to amend and no amendment could cure the jurisdictional deficiency.
What it means going forward
This decision reinforces that pro se litigants must still meet strict jurisdictional requirements and that the Court of Federal Claims cannot provide equitable remedies or hear claims against state officials under the Tucker Act.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download