Case: Ronald Johnson and Joann Johnson v. The United States
Abbreviation: Johnson v. United States
Decision Date: 1982-07-16
Docket Number: No. 68-82C
Citation: 231 Ct. Cl. 840
Volume: 231
Reporter: United States Court of Claims Reports
Court: United States Court of Claims
Jurisdiction: United States
Parties: Ronald Johnson and Joann Johnson v. The United States
Judges: Before Friedman, Chief Judge, Davis and Bennett, Judges.
Pages: 840–840

Head Matter:
No. 68-82C.
July 16, 1982
Ronald Johnson and Joann Johnson v. The United States
Frank J. Ragen, attorney of record, for plaintiffs.
Frank M. Rapoport, with whom was Assistant Attorney General J. Paul McGrath, for defendant.
Before Friedman, Chief Judge, Davis and Bennett, Judges.

Opinion:
per curiam:
This is a suit (almost exactly like Doe v. United States, ante at 716) in which plaintiff Ronald Johnson, claiming to be a former participant in the Witness Protection Program, asserts that the United States breached obligations owing to him. Plaintiffs seek mandamus, an injuction and other affirmative relief, a declaratory judgment, damages for tortious acts, and damages for alleged breaches of contractual commitments undertaken by the Government under the Witness Protection Program. Defendant has moved to dismiss. Plaintiffs have not responded and their time to do so has expired.
Doe v. United States, supra, is controlling. The nonmone-tary relief sought (including mandamus, injunctions, declaratory judgment) are beyond this court's jurisdiction, as is the claim for tortious damages. As for the part of the suit which attempts to found itself on the Witness Protection Act and Program, it is settled that a participant in that program has no legal right to receive any payment or money even where it is asserted that federal officials have breached promises made to the participants under the program.
Defendant's motion to dismiss is granted and the petition is dismissed.