Skip to main content

Adams v. United States

Fed. Cl.March 17, 2016No. 15-69CCited 1 time
Defendant WinUnited States Secret Service
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Elaine D. Kaplan
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss
Circuit
Federal Circuit

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wage Theft

Outcome

The Court of Federal Claims granted the government's partial motion to dismiss Count I for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, holding that 5 U.S.C. § 6101(a)(3)(A) and (B) are not money-mandating statutes under the Tucker Act.

What This Ruling Means

# Adams v. United States - Case Summary **What Happened** A worker named Adams filed an employment law case against the United States government in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The specific details of the dispute aren't fully described in the available information, but the case involved an employment-related disagreement. **What the Court Decided** The court dismissed the case, meaning it rejected Adams's claim. No damages (money compensation) were awarded to Adams. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case illustrates that not all employment disputes succeed in court. Workers bringing cases must meet specific legal requirements and present valid claims. The dismissal suggests that either Adams's claim didn't meet the court's requirements, lacked sufficient evidence, or fell outside what that particular court could decide. For workers to remember: filing a case is just the beginning. Courts carefully review whether claims are legally valid before allowing cases to proceed. If you believe you've been wronged at work, consulting with an employment attorney beforehand can help you understand whether your situation has legal merit in court.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Wage Theft cases

More Rulings in This Case

Other orders and opinions in Adams from the same court.

Dec 14, 2020
No. 20-909
Plaintiff Win
Jan 18, 2019
No. 16-1378
Defendant Win
May 9, 2016
No. 11-418C
Defendant Win
Oct 11, 2012
No. No. 10-60C
Settlement
Jun 18, 2010
No. No. 10-60C
Plaintiff Win
Dec 9, 2009
No. No. 90-162C
Defendant Win
Sep 21, 2007
No. No. 90-162C
Plaintiff Win
Sep 21, 2007
No. No. 90-162C
Plaintiff Win
Apr 27, 2005
No. No. 90-162C
Defendant Win
Apr 27, 2005
No. No. 90-162C
Mixed Result
Nov 30, 2001
No. No. 96-93C
Mixed Result
Feb 13, 2001
No. No. 96-93C
Defendant Win

Similar Rulings

C.D. Cal.Nov 2025
Mixed Result
Adams
Federal CircuitJun 2017
Defendant Win
Elizabeth F. Smith v. First Union National Bank
1st CircuitJan 2000
Mixed Result
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey
2nd CircuitSep 2014
Defendant Win
Irizarry v. Catsimatidis
2nd CircuitJul 2013
Mixed Result
Read Full OpinionMore United States Secret Service RulingsAll Rulings

Browse Related

More rulings from District of ColumbiaMore wage theft casesMore government & public sector employer cases

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check My RightsLearn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.