Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-89-06060/USCOURTS-ca10-89-06060-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 

---

... -

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

JAMES N. HUBBARD, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellant, ) 

) 

V • ) 

FI LED 

Uflited States Co,.irt of Appeals 

Tenth Cirruit 

MAR 141990 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

) 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

by and through FARMERS HOME ) No. 89-6060 

ADMINISTRATION, and OFFICE ) 

OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, ) 

agencies of the U.S. ) 

Department of Agriculture, ) 

LEIGH NALLEY, in his official ) 

capacity, BARRY R. JAMISON, ) 

SR., in his official ) 

capacity, and LARRY E. ) 

STEPHENSON, in his official ) 

capacity, ) 

) 

Defendants-Appellees. ) 

(D.C. Civil No. 88-191-B) 

( W. D. Ok la . ) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before BRORBY, SETH and MCWILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

*This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

Appellate Case: 89-6060 Document: 01019966136 Date Filed: 03/14/1990 Page: 1 
34(a); Tenth Circuit Rule 34.1.9. The cause is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Plaintiff James N. Hubbard appeals the district court's 

dismissal of all claims in this action brought under the 

United States Constitution and 31 u.s.c. § 3730(h). First, 

plaintiff claims the -district court erred in dismissing his claims 

against defendants Leigh Nalley, Barry Jamison, and Larry E. 

Stephenson, brought under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of 

Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388, for violations of his 

rights under the First Amendment. After reviewing the record in 

this case and in Hubbard v. United States, No. 88-1382 (10th 

Cir.), we conclude that plaintiff's First Amendment claims in this 

case are identical to those he asserted in an earlier action 

against these same defendants. Those claims were dismissed by the 

district court in the earlier case as barred under Bush v. Lucas, 

462 U.S. 367, and that dismissal was affirmed on appeal by this 

court. Hubbard v. United States, No. 88-1382 (10th Cir.). 

Plaintiff is thus barred from asserting identical claims in this 

case. 

Plaintiff also appeals the dismissal of his claims against 

the United States and the above-named individual defendants under 

31 u.s.c. § 3730(h). We agree with the district court that it 

lacks subject .matter jurisdiction over plaintiff's claim against 

the United States since Congress failed to waive the sovereign 

immunity of the United States in enacting 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h). 

-2-

Appellate Case: 89-6060 Document: 01019966136 Date Filed: 03/14/1990 Page: 2 
. . . 

As for plaintiff's claims against the individual defendants 

under this same statute, we agree with the dist~ict court that 

these claims would require the retrospective application of the 

statute. Plaintiff's employment with the government ended over 

three years before the enactment of§ 3730(h) gave federal 

employees the right· to bring suit under the False Claims Act. 

Normally, retroactive application of a statute is impermissible 

absent a clear indication of congressional intent to the contrary. 

Jensen v. United States, 662 F.2d 664, 667 (10th Cir.). Our 

review of the False Claims Amendments Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 

99-562, 100 Stat. 3153, reveals that Congress did not contemplate 

retroactive application of the Act. 

The judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. 

The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-3-

Entered for the Court 

Oliver Seth 

Circuit Judge 

/ 

Appellate Case: 89-6060 Document: 01019966136 Date Filed: 03/14/1990 Page: 3