Document: 508 U.S. 200 113 S.Ct. 2035 124 L.Ed.2d 118 KEENE CORPORATION, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 92-166. Argued March 23, 1993. Decided May 24, Syllabus * Petitioner Keene Corporation has been sued by thousands of plaintiffs alleging injury from exposure to asbestos fibers and dust released products. Claiming that it was following Government specifications in including within products supplied projects, actually bought fiber the Government, filed two complaints against United States Court Federal Claims recoup some money paying litigate settle suits. At time each complaints, had a similar claim pending another court; other actions were dismissed before ordered dismissals at issue here. The both cases on authority 28 U.S.C. § 1500, which prohibits exercising jurisdiction over "for or respect which" plaintiff "has [a suit process] pending" any court, finding same claims courts when cases. Appeals affirmed. Held: Section 1500 precludes Keene's actions. Pp. ____. (a) In applying jurisdictional bar here looking facts existing its followed longstanding principle court's depends upon state things action is brought. Mollan v. Torrance, 22 (9 Wheat.) 537, 539, 6 L.Ed. 154. gives no convincing reason for dispensing with this rule favor one would look Claims' ruling motion dismiss. Although provisions surrounding use phrase "jurisdiction render judgment," speaks "jurisdiction," without more; fact only underscores Court's duty refrain reading into statute Congress left out. appeal statutory history more availing, since expressed clear intent shift provision's language "file prosecute" "jurisdiction" indicated change substantive law. (b) For purposes possible dismissal under must be compared determine whether court to" raised Claims. That comparison turns plaintiff's based substantially operative as action, least if there overlap relief requested, see, Ex parte Skinner & Eddy Corp., 265 86, 44 446, 68 912; Corona Coal Co. States, 263 156, 431, not are different legal theories, see British American Tobacco 89 Ct.Cl. 438 (per curiam ). Since interpretation 1500's immediate predecessor represented settled law reenacted 1948, presumption aware earlier judicial interpretations and, effect, adopted them applied Thus, rejects theory does apply because suits rested theories could have pleaded (c) There need address question Appeals' construction "a new law" ought prospectively test set out Chevron Oil Huson, 404 97, 92 349, 30 296, well-settled Finally, policy arguments should addressed Congress. 962 F.2d 1013 (CA Fed.1992), SOUTER, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, BLACKMUN, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, JJ., joined. STEVENS, dissenting opinion. Richard G. Taranto, Washington, DC, petitioner. Lawrence Wallace, respondent. Justice SOUTER Court. 1 made company acquired. trying cases, Claims.1 When complaint, however, court. We hold consequently affirm complaints. 2 Through subsidiary Building Products Corporation, manufactured sold thermal insulation acoustical containing asbestos, did acquired 1968, Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc. mid-1970's, began suing tort, death fibers. typical case defendants District Western Pennsylvania, Miller Johns-Manville 78-1283E, alleged, behalf estate Dzon, decedent died lung cancer caused inhaled during employment 1943 1944. June 1979, third-party complaint Dzon exposed accordance contracts, seeking indemnification contribution damages might pay plaintiff. This ended, 1980, granted voluntary complaint. 3 meantime, December still pending, first here, amounts been, may recovered claimants, settlement judgment." Corp. 579-79C (Keene I ), App. Pet. Cert. H15. "claimants" defined than 2,500 lawsuits "by persons personal inhalation contained products" subsidiaries. Id., H3. alleges conformance inclusion shipyards projects funded controlled further even used recovery breach implied warranties contracts between Keene, entertain, given amount Tucker Act, 1491(a)(1). 4 next move came month 23-count Southern New York. 80-CIV-0401(GLG). pleadings tracked, almost verbatim, lengthy factual allegations I, but recast terms various tort again paid claimants. also added takings Government's allegedly improper recoupment, Employees' Compensation Act (FECA), 5 8132, claimants covered Act. this, sought restitution "the be, recouped [the States] judgments settlements Keene," 37, well an injunction collection FECA refunds thereafter. suffered September 1981, basis sovereign immunity, held unaffected waiver found Tort Suits Admiralty Public Vessels affirmed, 700 836 (CA2 1983), we denied certiorari, 464 864, 104 195, 78 171 (1983). Only five days District's omnibus returned second 585-81C II one, too, repeats many adopts case, payment recouped" Keene. F10-F11. Again, recoupments said property due process just compensation, contrary Fifth Amendment. See 1491(a)(1) (covering, inter alia, certain "founded . Constitution"). After present sua sponte brought Johns-Manville, invoked moving dismiss II, like product manufacturers. With trial imminent initially them. 12 Cl.Ct. 197 (1987). decision affirmed appeal, 855 1556 Fed.1988) cert. denied, 489 1066, 109 1342, 103 811 (1989), then entered among courts. 17 146 (1989). While panel Circuit reversed ground inapplicable elsewhere entertained acted dismiss, UNR Industries, 911 654 (1990), Appeals, en banc, subsequently vacated opinion, 926 1109 dismissals, (1992). certiorari. 506 ----, 373, 121 285 7 cited dismissing want U.S.C.A. (Supp.1993): 8 "The shall his assignee person who, cause alleged such arose, was, thereto, acting professing act, directly indirectly States."2 9 lineage text runs back century aftermath Civil War, residents Confederacy who involuntarily parted (usually cotton) war compensation Claims, Abandoned Property Collection ch. 120, Stat. 820 (1863). these cotton difficulty meeting condition they aid comfort participants rebellion, resorted separate federal officials, conversion. Schwartz, Judicial Code Duplicate Against Its Agents, 55 Geo.L.J. 573, 574-580 (1967). It duplicative induced prohibit anyone filing prosecuting "any he commenced officer agent States. 25, 1868, 71, 8, 15 77. long outlived having incorporated minor changes Revised Statutes 1878, Rev.Stat. 1067, 18 (1874); 154 1911, Mar. 3, 231, 154, 36 1138 (codified 260 (1940)); finally form 646, 62 942 1500). 10 argues error below focusing (instead dismiss) ignore differences exist those Courts. Neither assignment will stand. A. 11 constitutional define lower courts, Finley 490 545, 548, 2003, 2006, 593 once lines drawn, "limits neither disregarded nor evaded." Owen Equipment Erection Kroger, 437 365, 374, 98 2396, 2403, 57 274 (1978). employed power provide "shall jurisdiction" claim, brought." Wheat. (1824) (Marshall, C.J.); Gwaltney Smithfield, Ltd. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., 484 49, 69, 108 376, 387, 306 (1987) (opinion J.); St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Red Cab Co., 303 283, 289-290, 58 586, 590-591, 82 845 (1938); Minneapolis Louis R. Peoria Pekin Union 270 580, 46 402, 405, 70 743 (1926). acknowledging what calls "general rule" subject-matter filing, us dispense Brief 33. Assuming could,3 nothing convince should. spoke judgment" instead pure simple, "all preclude" application time-of-filing rule. 34. But, deciding carry significance, say more, whereas nearby sections title longer phrase. our " '[W]here includes particular section omits ., generally presumed acts intentionally purposely disparate exclusion.' Russello 16, 300, (1983) (citation omitted). 13 history, availing. provided "[n]o file prosecute process. ." 1138. express prohibition could, course, doubt applied. Shapiro 168 625, 626 (CA3 1948) (§ "forbids filing" Little related pending); 438, 439 (1939) ) (dismissing where, "[a]t petition claim"), 310 627, 60 974, 84 1398 (1940); Jersey Worsted Mills 80 640, 641, F.Supp. 605, 606 (1935) ("[W]e think permitted court"). urges significance deletion current reference comprehensive revision completed do presume worked underlying "unless make [a] chang[e] clearly expressed." Fourco Glass Transmirra 353 222, 227, 77 787, 791, 786 (1957) (footnote omitted); Newman-Green, Alfonzo-Larrain, 826, 831, n. 4, 2218, 2222, 893 (1989); supra, U.S., 554, S.Ct., 2009; Tidewater 409 151, 162, 93 408, 415, 34 375 (1972). On point expression specific general, Reviser's Note indicates "in phraseology," H.R.Rep. 308, 80th Cong., 1st Sess., A140 (1947); cf. 2222. indeed, comes up contrary, read continuing claim.4 B 14 notion comparable elusive. By precluding requires lawsuit. exact nature illuminated, awkward formulation 1500. Nor advance ball very far recognize statute's later process," term "claim" synonymously "cause action," Black's Law Dictionary 247 (6th ed. 1990) (defining action"), since, parties admit, "claim," can variety meanings. 18; 15; F.2d, 1560. Fortunately, though, turn readings word appears statute. remained unchanged 77, prior encounters shed light issue. 431 (1924), coal requisitioned Government. Before bringing President's causes therein forth being [Court Claims] case." 156. noting "arose of" setting, appeal. 539-540, Later year, writ mandamus stop reinstating earlier, prejudice, own motion. 912 (1924). nearly $17.5 million; "[t]he largest item anticipated profits 25 vessels" order, cancelled, Emergency Fleet Corporation. 91, 447. "on Claims." 92, predicate same, except omission demand profits, thus limiting $9.1 million. issued mandamus, holding prevented intervening suit.5 16 A few years later, key foreshadowed Eddy: "other" proceeded theories. after surrendered gold bullion (in compliance executive orders regulations took country off standard), underpaid $4.3 Earlier day, surrendered." 439. observed distinction instituted sound contract." 440. Because facts, lack jurisdiction, "clear 'claim,' claimant seeks enforce demand." Ibid. These precedents demonstrate requested.6 Eddy, supra; Coal, supra. matter. Tobacco, "claim 942, Lorillard Pons, 434 575, 866, 870, 40 (1978); Powell, 379 48, 55, 13, 85 248, 253-54 112 (1964) (presumption "settled construction" reenactment). strikes us, moreover, sensible statute, honors Congress's limit well. latter limits identity precision, intend rendered useless narrow concept providing correspondingly liberal opportunity maintain arising foundation. nonetheless argues, merits brief,7 "[a] outside 'for to' only] claim-splitting treat ie., require joined single suit—if States." 20. Under theory, unless (as been) But reinterpretation bound fail, novelty always fatal old novel proposition suggested useless, all instances, effect object originally enacted accomplish. fails explain how original whose beyond today.8 squarely rejected Tobacco,9 time. III 19 takes tack adopt Appeals's announcing 296 (1971). 42-43. Even assuming call "pure prospectivity," James B. Beam Distilling Georgia, 501 111 2439, 2448, 115 481 (1991) J.), fairly fall questions presented,10 because, points out, 20 sure, announced overruling cases: Tecon Engineers, 170 389, 343 943 (1965), 382 976, 86 468 (1966); Casman 135 647 (1956); Boston Five Cents Savings Bank, FSB 864 137 Fed.1988); Brown 175 343, 358 1002 (1966) ); Hossein 218 727 (1978) And while contends less repudiations precedent sufficed suits, supporting position plea prospectivity decision. 21 find unnecessary consider, much repudiate, "judicially created exceptions" Casman, Five. 1021. Engineers later-filed oust earlier-filed complaint; actions, now concedes "unnecessary question" claims. Reply 14, 14; recognized exception (followed seek distinctly types courts; monetary II. 6, Brown, reinstated dismissed, grounds "no 'pending' itself lay exclusively Ct.Cl., 348, 1004. Brown's reasoning, derogation Claims's exclusive echoed Hossein, per order citing point.11 Five, 139-140 (following not, falling gets support Hossein.12 "new work Oil, 106, 355, plunge retroactivity analysis.13 IV until about several arguments, answer addresses wrong forum. operates circumstances deprive assert rights available "under complex schemes govern Government." 15. judge anachronistic, Cl.Ct., 205; A.C. Seeman, 386, 389 (1984), good argument that, enacted, perform preclusion function emphasized sponsor, Geo.L.J., 579. "proper theater" told disappointed ago, "is halls Congress, branch government limited Claims."14 Smoot's Case, Wall. 36, 45, 107 (1873). enjoy "liberty add remove apparent hardship," 540, therefore judgment 23 Affirmed. 24 dissenting. my simply once, longer, district Rather, continue pursue so decides demands "election either leave courts" time.1 26 grant performed immediately preceding give founded Constitution, regulation department, contract States," 1491(a)(1), disbursing .," 1496 (emphases added). 1497; 1499 (granting "render claims).2 contrast, "takes away though subject matter appropriately Court." 1013, 1028 Fed.1992) (Plager, dissenting) (emphasis deleted). reasonable assume bestow: enter judgment. 27 provides 'shall jurisdiction' '. which' 'has pending' Ante, ____ Accordingly, adjudicate otherwise bring jurisdiction. invoke putting choice: "leave courts," 1, forgo proceedings If declines proceed it, retain docket disposition action. free decide case. construed quarter (1966),3 interpret broader pretrial proceedings. true version pending. text, prescribe consequences prohibited filing. view mention suggest pendency treated defect warranting automatic dismissal.4 Instead, plain statement legislation's sponsor intended force election remedies trial, giving right avoid litigation, chose abandon elsewhere. 29 event, revised removed nevertheless assumes drafted, 1948 revisions ante, fact, significant change, enlarging class include agents. ____, 6; Matson Navigation 284 352, 355-356, 52 164-165, 76 336 (1932); 579-580 mean best evidence meant, cannot relied reading. judgment, properly 1966 provision merely choose alternative proceeding trial. judgments, ability simultaneous prevent allowing remain required election. agree endorse litigants rely reasoned important seen fit alter. McNally 483 350, 376-377, 2875, 2890-2891, 97 292 (STEVENS, (citing cases). Whether "novelty statute," consistent line raises equitable concerns disregarded.5 31 Admittedly, badly drafted Viewed landscape changed dramatically lend easily construction. Moreover, today salutary hastening repeal amendment. Nevertheless, faithful stated purpose surely preferable harsh result endorses respectfully dissent. syllabus constitutes part prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Lumber 321, 337, 282, 287, 50 499. Soon thereafter, transferred functions newly "United Courts Improvement 1982, 133, 96 39-41. renamed Technical Procedural Improvements 1992, 902, 106 4516. To confusion, refer latest name. referred "Court Claims" rather (1976 ed.). amended twice, substitute Court" Claims," 133(e)(1), 40, "Claims Court," 902(a), score, cites practical considerations create exceptions 35-36. accurate, shown should, could. note, Newman-Green reiterated existence ordinarily filed." 830, continues claim. Cf. (1966). As noted below, raise 1030, dissenting). encounter (1932), where words "against States" close loophole. 942; 1556, 1566-1567, Fed.1988). presented completely relief, implicate argued certiorari I. press writ, disturb rulings below. 1024 ("we quarrel determination same"). tried meet objection. assumes, jurisdictional, arguing meant supplement formalistic nineteenth res judicata. According judicata barred instigating lost identical (and vice versa), difference named assumption eliminated non-identity defendant barrier judicata, prove multiple law, concludes, suit, intended. 7. terms, fails, 1868 try conversion, however conversion action; survived, leaving solve problem addressing. represents "well-established law," Allied Materials 210 714 (1976) situation. 1566-1567; 139. explanation. discussed, purported overrule, undoubtedly established. See, e.g., 1562-1563; Los Angeles Shipbuilding Drydock 138 648, 652, 152 236, 238 (1957); Hill 382, 386-388 (1985). misplaced. contain direct prospectivity, i, although argue overruled prospectively, id., reject, applied, 1025. note failed consider possibility situation, transfer 1960. Sept. 1960, 74 1406(c) (1964 ed.)); Apr. 2, 301(a), 1631). survive today, ignored discussed Part II-A, asks "make refiles claims, tolling eliminate limitations bar." 45. response request advisory recent attempt S. 2521, 102d 2d 10(c) (1992); Cong.Rec. S4830-S4832 (Apr. 1992). Senator Edmunds explained follows: 'The amendment put their large particularly, Secretary Treasury agents hundred scattered there, endeavoring expense beating around whole am sure everybody that.' 1018 (quoting 81 Cong. Globe, 40th 2769 (1868). Sections §§ 1503, 1508. "At time, therefore, plaintiffs' "In motions rehearing, vacate petit ion, deny defendant's Our predicated 'claim remains Court.' true, 'pending court.' believe forum compensation." Bank 137, 139 (staying Prillman 220 677, 679 (1979) (same). Holmes pointed context, Mississippi frauds, 'An whereby charge defendant,' go Of course logically scope, common sense revolt." Fauntleroy Lum, 230, 235, 642, 1039 (1908) (internal citation minimize suggesting petitioner relies event petitioner's fell view, warrant reading, stand former bars adjudication National Steel 274, 275-276 (1985) concurrent reinstatement suit). felt necessary overrule 1022, suggests understanding scope.

Category: 8