context: Pursuant to section 4654(c), expenses associated with filing a Fifth Amendment takings claim are reimbursable; expenses incurred prior and not directly related to the filing itself are not.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.parenthetical: holding "that the plain language of 42 U.S.C. SS 4654(c) precludes the court from including in its award to the plaintiffs any reimbursement for expenses incurred by the plaintiffs before they decided to file suit in the Court of Claims under 28 U.S.C.- SS 1491."
citation_a.sentence: See, e.g., Preseault v. United States, 52 Fed.Cl. 667, 671 (2002) (“Section 4654(c) does not provide for the reimbursement of expenses incurred by plaintiffs before their decision to file suit in the Court of Federal Claims.”); see also Emeny v. United States, 208 Ct.Cl. 522, 527, 526 F.2d 1121 (1975) (holding “that the plain language of 42 U.S.C. § 4654(c) precludes the court from including in its award to the plaintiffs any reimbursement for expenses incurred by the plaintiffs before they decided to file suit in the Court of Claims under 28 U.S.C.- § 1491.”). Although the Court acknowledges that Marzulla Law may have used the factual and legal knowledge it gained by drafting the preliminary report in litigating Otay Mesa’s takings claim, ultimately this fee was not incurred “because of such proceeding.” 42 U.S.C. § 4654(c). As such, it is not within this Court’s purview to award compensation to Otay Mesa for the litigation strategy memorandum.
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 52 Fed.Cl. 667, 671
citation_b.parenthetical: "Section 4654(c) does not provide for the reimbursement of expenses incurred by plaintiffs before their decision to file suit in the Court of Federal Claims."
citation_b.sentence: See, e.g., Preseault v. United States, 52 Fed.Cl. 667, 671 (2002) (“Section 4654(c) does not provide for the reimbursement of expenses incurred by plaintiffs before their decision to file suit in the Court of Federal Claims.”); see also Emeny v. United States, 208 Ct.Cl. 522, 527, 526 F.2d 1121 (1975) (holding “that the plain language of 42 U.S.C. § 4654(c) precludes the court from including in its award to the plaintiffs any reimbursement for expenses incurred by the plaintiffs before they decided to file suit in the Court of Claims under 28 U.S.C.- § 1491.”). Although the Court acknowledges that Marzulla Law may have used the factual and legal knowledge it gained by drafting the preliminary report in litigating Otay Mesa’s takings claim, ultimately this fee was not incurred “because of such proceeding.” 42 U.S.C. § 4654(c). As such, it is not within this Court’s purview to award compensation to Otay Mesa for the litigation strategy memorandum.