Spaan v. United States , 208 F. App'x 898 ( 2006 )

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
2006-5110
JAMES BRADLEY SPAAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES,
Defendant-Appellee.
__________________________
DECIDED: December 6, 2006
__________________________
Before NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, CLEVENGER, Senior Circuit Judge, and DYK, Circuit
Judge.
PER CURIAM.
James Bradley Spaan appeals from the Order of the United States Court of
Federal Claims dismissing his complaint for want of jurisdiction. Spaan v. United
States, No. 06-CV-454 (June 16, 2006). We affirm.
I
Mr. Spaan’s complaint, filed June 8, 2006, is labeled as a Federal Tort Claim.
The complaint alleges a variety of wrongs committed by various federal, state and local
officials and governmental entities, as well as by named corporations and religious
groups. Mr. Spaan alleges various crimes committed against him as a part of an
international “Conspiracy of Traitors.” He seeks monetary damages, the set aside of his
convictions in state and federal courts, voiding of the dissolution of his marriage and
entry of an order annulling the marriage on the grounds of fraud, and other declaratory
and injunctive relief.
The Court of Federal Claims determined that the specific wrongs alleged in
Mr. Spaan’s complaint sound in tort. The jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims is
defined by statute and expressly excludes cases sounding in tort. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1491(a)(1) (2000). As the jurisdiction of the court is also expressly limited to claims
against the United States, the court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate
claims against the non-U.S. government defendants. Further, the Court of Federal
Claims explained that it lacked jurisdiction to review convictions of other state and
federal courts.
Having carefully reviewed Mr. Spaan’s lengthy complaint, the court determined
that none of Mr. Spaan’s allegations raised matter within the court’s jurisdiction.
Consequently, the complaint was dismissed.
II
Mr. Spaan timely appealed to this court. We have jurisdiction to review the Order
dismissing his complaint, see 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(3) (2000), and we review de novo the
order dismissing the complaint for want of jurisdiction. Shearin v. United States,
992 F.2d 1195 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
We called for the complete record from the Court of Federal Claims and
inspected the 180-page complaint. We see no error in the Order dismissing his
2006-5110 2
complaint. Mr. Spaan’s alleged wrongs are torts committed either by the Federal
Government or by state, local or private entitles and individuals over whom the Court of
Federal Claims lacks jurisdiction. The Order dismissing his complaint is affirmed.
2006-5110 3