This article is provided for general educational and informational purposes only. It is not legal, financial, or tax advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws, procedures, and agency rules can differ by jurisdiction and may change over time. A qualified professional can address specific facts and current requirements. The author and publisher are not responsible for actions taken based on this information.
Key Facts
- Federal level: The American Bar Association House of Delegates adopted Resolution 300 during the February 2013 Midyear Meeting.
- Federal level: The 2013 resolution formally urged Congress to repeal and replace the jurisdictional limits established by 28 U.S.C. § 1500.
- Federal level: Under 28 U.S.C. § 1500, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims lacks jurisdiction over claims if the plaintiff has a related lawsuit pending in another court.
- Federal level: Resolution 300 aligned with Recommendation 2012-6 from the Administrative Conference of the United States.
- Federal level: The proposed legislative reform sought to replace the jurisdictional bar with a legal presumption that would stay the later-filed lawsuit.
- Federal level: Both the ABA and ACUS argued the existing law creates procedural traps and causes non-merits dismissals of valid claims against the United States.
- Federal level: Despite the historical policy advocacy in 2013, Congress did not repeal the statute.
- Federal level: As of 2026, 28 U.S.C. § 1500 remains active federal law governing the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
Last reviewed: May 2026. Legal rules, forms, deadlines, and procedures can change by jurisdiction, agency, and court system.
During the February 2013 Midyear Meeting, the American Bar Association House of Delegates adopted Resolution 300. This formal policy document advocated for the repeal and replacement of 28 U.S.C. § 1500, a federal statute that limits the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The resolution highlighted procedural challenges faced by plaintiffs seeking relief against the United States government and urged Congress to update the federal judicial process.
The Jurisdictional Bar of 28 U.S.C. § 1500
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1500, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims is deprived of jurisdiction over a claim if the plaintiff has a related lawsuit pending in another court against the United States. Congress originally designed the statute in the nineteenth century to prevent duplicative litigation and manage post-Civil War property claims. Today, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims handles specific types of lawsuits against the federal government, including monetary claims over contracts, military pay, and certain constitutional takings.
Because of the jurisdictional division in the federal court system, plaintiffs sometimes have claims arising from the same event that must be filed in different courts. For example, a plaintiff might pursue a tort claim in a federal district court while pursuing a related contract claim in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The existing statute forces plaintiffs to navigate complex filing sequences to avoid having their cases dismissed on procedural grounds.
Alignment with the Administrative Conference of the United States
The ABA resolution aligned with and supported a 2012 policy document, Recommendation 2012-6, from the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS). Both organizations argued that the existing statute forces plaintiffs to elect remedies prematurely and creates unnecessary procedural traps. According to the historical ACUS report, the jurisdictional bar interferes with the orderly administration of justice by causing non-merits dismissals of valid legal claims.
To fix the issue, the ABA and ACUS proposed replacing the strict jurisdictional bar with a legal presumption. Under the proposed legislative reform, the court presiding over the later-filed action would stay the lawsuit, in whole or in part, until the first action was no longer pending. This approach aimed to allow federal courts to manage parallel claims effectively without automatically dismissing them.
The Current Legal Status of 28 U.S.C. § 1500
While the 2013 resolution represents a notable piece of historical policy advocacy, it did not alter binding federal law. As of 2026, Congress has not repealed 28 U.S.C. § 1500, and the jurisdictional restriction remains active. Legal professionals navigating the federal court system generally account for the active statute when filing related claims against the government. This historical record reflects the broader context of other issues addressed by the ABA regarding court access and its continuing focus on advancing access to justice.
