United States v. Bormes
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11-192 | Fed. Cir. | Oct 2, 2012 | Nov 13, 2012 | 9-0 | Scalia | OT 2012 |
Holding: The Little Tucker Act does not waive the government"s sovereign immunity with respect to Fair Credit Reporting Act damages actions.
Plain English Holding: After James Bormes paid a fee to the United States over the Internet, he argued that the receipt displayed too much information about his credit card. When he tried to sue the United States for damages under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the federal government countered that it was immune from lawsuits seeking money. A federal court in Washington agreed with Bormes, concluding that he could sue the United States for money damages under the Little Tucker Act, which allows lawsuits like the one brought by Bormes to go forward in the federal trial courts around the country. The government asked the Supreme Court to hear the case, and the Court reversed. It held that the Little Tucker Act did not apply to cases brought under the FCRA, and it sent the case to another federal court for it to decide whether the suit should still go forward under that Act.
Judgment: Vacated and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Scalia on November 13, 2012.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Opinion analysis: Court rebuffs Federal Circuit laxity on federal sovereign immunity (Ronald Mann, November 15, 2012)
- Government may be immune on credit revelation (Lyle Denniston, November 13, 2012)
- Argument recap: Court skeptical of government liability under FCRA (Ronald Mann, October 3, 2012)
- Argument preview: Government fights battle against plain language in FCRA dispute (Ronald Mann, September 27, 2012)
- Three new cases granted (UPDATED) (Lyle Denniston, January 13, 2012)
| Date | Proceedings and Orders |
|---|---|
| 06/02/2011 | Application (10A1172) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 13, 2011 to July 13, 2011, submitted to The Chief Justice. |
| 06/03/2011 | Application (10A1172) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until July 13, 2011. |
| 07/01/2011 | Application (10A1172) to extend further the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from July 13, 2011 to August 12, 2011, submitted to The Chief Justice. |
| 07/01/2011 | Application (10A1172) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until August 12, 2011. |
| 08/12/2011 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 15, 2011) |
| 09/28/2011 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 14, 2011. |
| 10/06/2011 | Response Requested . (Due November 7, 2011) |
| 10/19/2011 | Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 7, 2011. |
| 12/07/2011 | Brief of respondent James X. Bormes in opposition filed. |
| 12/21/2011 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 13, 2012. |
| 12/22/2011 | Reply of petitioner United States filed. (Distributed) |
| 01/13/2012 | Petition GRANTED. |
| 02/17/2012 | The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including April 13, 2012. |
| 03/09/2012 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner the United States. |
| 04/02/2012 | Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED. |
| 04/13/2012 | Brief of petitioner the United States filed. |
| 05/04/2012 | The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 3, 2012. |
| 07/03/2012 | Brief of respondent James X. Bormes filed. |
| 07/23/2012 | SET FOR AGRUMENT ON Tuesday, October 2, 2012 |
| 07/24/2012 | CIRCULATED. |
| 07/31/2012 | Record received from U.S.C.A. for Federal Circuit. (1 envelope) |
| 08/02/2012 | Reply of petitioner the United States filed. (Distributed) |
| 08/22/2012 | Record from U.S.D.C. for Northern District of Illinois is electronic. |
| 10/02/2012 | Argued. For petitioner: Sri Srinivasan, Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: John G. Jabobs, Chicago, Ill. |
| 11/13/2012 | Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Scalia, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. |
| 12/17/2012 | JUDGMENT ISSUED. |
| 04/23/2013 | Record returned to U.S.C.A. for Federal Circuit. |
Holding: The Little Tucker Act does not waive the government”s sovereign immunity with respect to Fair Credit Reporting Act damages actions.
Plain English Holding: After James Bormes paid a fee to the United States over the Internet, he argued that the receipt displayed too much information about his credit card. When he tried to sue the United States for damages under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the federal government countered that it was immune from lawsuits seeking money. A federal court in Washington agreed with Bormes, concluding that he could sue the United States for money damages under the Little Tucker Act, which allows lawsuits like the one brought by Bormes to go forward in the federal trial courts around the country. The government asked the Supreme Court to hear the case, and the Court reversed. It held that the Little Tucker Act did not apply to cases brought under the FCRA, and it sent the case to another federal court for it to decide whether the suit should still go forward under that Act.
Judgment:”Vacated and remanded, 9-0, in an opinion by Justice Scalia on November 13, 2012.