Mikkilineni v. United States

Type

Opinion of the Court

Per curiam

Yes — no individual author

Filed

Dec. 5, 2002

Case

Mikkilineni v. United States

Case status

Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

PER CURIAM. M.R. Mikkilineni appeals from a decision of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his claims for lack of jurisdiction and, alternatively, as time-barred under the twelve-month limitations period of the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), 41 U.S.C. § 609 (a). We affirm. Mr. Mikkilineni cites the CDA as the jurisdictional basis for his complaint. The CDA, however, applies only to those who are in privity of contract with the government. Erickson Air Crane Co. v. United States, 731 F.2d 810, 813 (Fed.Cir.1984). Moreover, Rule 17 of the Rules of the Court of Federal Claims requires every action to be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. Mr Mikkilineni in his individual capacity was not a party to the contract at issue and thus not the real party in interest. Accordingly, he may not maintain this suit. The heart of Mr. Mikkilineni’s argument is that he, as sole share-holder of Talasila, Inc. and successor-in-interest to its assets, can bring this cause of action in his own name. This is not supported by Texas law. Under the Texas corporate survival statute, the dissolved corporation itself retains limited rights, including the right to prosecute any …

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.