CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - COURT OF CLAIMS - SEPARATION OF POWERS

Authors

Benjamin M. Quigg, Jr. S.Ed., University of Michigan Law SchoolFollow

Abstract

Plaintiff sued the United States Government for breach of its contract for construction of a water supply tunnel, and in 1932 recovered judgment in the court of claims for approximately one-seventh of the amount sued for. Motions for new trial were denied and the Supreme Court refused to grant a writ of certiorari. In 1942 plaintiff secured the passage of a special act of Congress conferring jurisdiction on the court of claims to render judgment on plaintiff's claim in accordance with the mode of calculation set forth therein, waiving any defenses which the government might have in respect thereto, and further providing that a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court for a review of the judgment rendered might be applied for. Plaintiff thereupon filed a petition to recover additional compensation under the contract in accordance with the special act of Congress. Held, the special act of Congress giving the court of claims jurisdiction to hear a claim against the United States, notwithstanding previous determination by that court, and directing that court how to decide the case was unconstitutional as an invasion of the prerogatives of the judicial department. Congress cannot by its legislative act decide a law suit pending in the court of claims, nor does Congress have power to set aside a judgment of that court and direct a contrary decision. Pope v. United States, (Ct. Cl. 1944) 53 F. Supp. 570.

Recommended Citation

Benjamin M. Quigg, Jr. S.Ed., CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - COURT OF CLAIMS - SEPARATION OF POWERS, 43 Mich. L. Rev. 204 (1944).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol43/iss1/9