Skip to content
National Association of Attorneys General
  • Issues
    • Issues
      • Anticorruption
      • Antitrust
      • Bankruptcy
      • Charities
      • Civil Law
    • Issues
      • Consumer Protection
      • Criminal Law
      • Cyber and Technology
      • Disaster Preparedness & Response
      • Elder Justice
    • Issues
      • Ethics
      • Human Trafficking
      • Medicaid Fraud
      • Opioids
      • Powers & Duties
    • Issues
      • Public Health
      • The U.S. Supreme Court
      • Tobacco
      • Veterans & Military
  • Our Work
    • Training & Research
    • Centers
      • Center for Consumer Protection
      • Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
      • Center for Tobacco & Public Health
    • Committees
    • Initiatives
      • Presidential Initiative
      • Strategic Partnerships
      • International Fellows
      • COVID-19
    • Bankruptcy
    • Policy & Advocacy
  • Events & Training
    • Event Calendar
    • Attorney General Symposium
    • Presidential Summit
    • Capital Forum
    • Region Meetings
    • CLE Credit
    • NAAG Trainings
    • Online Learning
    • NAMFCU Trainings
    • NAAG Faculty
  • News & Resources
    • Attorney General Journal
    • Reports & Publications
    • Newsroom
    • NAAG Policy Letters
    • Podcasts
    • Online Learning
    • Research & Data
    • Member Directory
  • Attorneys General
    • What Attorneys General Do
    • Who is my Attorney General?
    • Attorneys General Office 101
    • Research & Data
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Careers in Attorney General Offices
    • Careers in Medicaid Fraud Control Units
  • About NAAG
    • NAAG Staff
    • NAAG Leadership
    • NAAG Member Services
    • NAAG Regions
    • NAAG FAQs
    • SAGE
    • NAMFCU
    • Newsroom
    • Careers at NAAG
  • Find my AG
  • About NAMFCU
    • About the Medicaid Fraud Control Units
    • Reporting Fraud and Abuse
    • MFCU Member Hub
    • Careers with a MFCU
  • Contact Us
National Association of Attorneys General
  • Find My AG
  • Consumer Complaints
  • Member Benefits
  • Contact Us
Log In
  • Issues
    • Issues
      • Anticorruption
      • Antitrust
      • Bankruptcy
      • Charities
      • Civil Law
    • Issues
      • Consumer Protection
      • Criminal Law
      • Cyber and Technology
      • Disaster Preparedness & Response
      • Elder Justice
    • Issues
      • Ethics
      • Human Trafficking
      • Medicaid Fraud
      • Opioids
      • Powers & Duties
    • Issues
      • Public Health
      • The U.S. Supreme Court
      • Tobacco
      • Veterans & Military
  • Our Work
    • Training & Research
    • Centers
      • Center for Consumer Protection
      • Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
      • Center for Tobacco & Public Health
    • Committees
    • Initiatives
      • Presidential Initiative
      • Strategic Partnerships
      • International Fellows
      • COVID-19
    • Bankruptcy
    • Policy & Advocacy
  • Events & Training
    • Event Calendar
    • Attorney General Symposium
    • Presidential Summit
    • Capital Forum
    • Region Meetings
    • CLE Credit
    • NAAG Trainings
    • Online Learning
    • NAMFCU Trainings
    • NAAG Faculty
  • News & Resources
    • Attorney General Journal
    • Reports & Publications
    • Newsroom
    • NAAG Policy Letters
    • Podcasts
    • Online Learning
    • Research & Data
    • Member Directory
  • Attorneys General
    • What Attorneys General Do
    • Who is my Attorney General?
    • Attorneys General Office 101
    • Research & Data
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Careers in Attorney General Offices
    • Careers in Medicaid Fraud Control Units
  • About NAAG
    • NAAG Staff
    • NAAG Leadership
    • NAAG Member Services
    • NAAG Regions
    • NAAG FAQs
    • SAGE
    • NAMFCU
    • Newsroom
    • Careers at NAAG
  • Find my AG
  • About NAMFCU
    • About the Medicaid Fraud Control Units
    • Reporting Fraud and Abuse
    • MFCU Member Hub
    • Careers with a MFCU
  • Contact Us

Supreme Court Report: Wilkins v. United States, 21-1164

Home / Supreme Court / Supreme Court Report: Wilkins v. United States, 21-1164
June 15, 2022 Supreme Court
Share this

  • Dan Schweitzer
    Director, Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
    National Association of Attorneys General

Volume 29, Issue 15

This Report summarizes opinions issued on June 6 and 8, 2022 (Part I); and cases granted review on June 6, 2022 (Part II).

Opinion: Wilkins v. United States, 21-1164

Wilkins v. United States, 21-1164. The Court will consider “[w]hether the Quiet Title Act’s Statute of Limitations is a jurisdictional requirement or a claim-processing rule.” The Quiet Title Act (QTA) authorizes lawsuits against the United States to resolve property disputes where the government claims an interest in the land.  There is a time limit, however, and such a suit “shall be barred unless it is commenced within twelve years of the date upon which it accrued.” 28 U.S.C. §2409a(g).  Claims accrue “on the date the plaintiff or his predecessor in interest knew or should have known of the claim of the United States.” Petitioners Larry Wilkins and Jane Stanton have owned land on Robbins Gulch Road in Montana since 2004 and 1990, respectively. The federal government owns an easement on their properties, granted to it by the landowners’ predecessors in 1962. The landowners claim the easement began to “unreasonably burden” their properties after the Forest Service installed a sign along Robbins Gulch Roach in September 2006 that read “public access thru private lands.” Expanded public use of the easement had detrimental effects on the properties such as theft, unauthorized hunting, and erosion of the road. The landowners sued the Forest Service under the QTA in August 2018, alleging the easement does not permit public use of the road. The government moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, arguing the claims are time-barred. The landowners responded that the QTA’s limitations period is not jurisdictional and that their claims only accrued when the Forest Service erected the sign. The district court granted the government’s motion and the Ninth Circuit affirmed. 13 F.4th 791.

The Ninth Circuit concluded that the QTA’s statute of limitations is jurisdictional based on “clear and direct holdings” from the Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit that “still control” despite more recent decisions applying “a seemingly different framework for assessing whether a statute of limitations is jurisdictional.”  In particular, the court relied on Block v. North Dakota, 461 U.S. 273, 292 (1983), in which the Supreme Court stated that if the QTA lawsuit was time-barred, “the courts below had no jurisdiction to inquire into the merits.” The Ninth Circuit rejected the landowners’ argument that United States v. Kwai Fun Wong, 575 U.S. 402 (2015)—which considered whether the statute of limitations in the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) is subject to equitable tolling—demanded a different result.  Wong analyzed the FTCA’s statute-of-limitations language providing that an untimely action “shall be forever barred.” 28 U.S.C. §2401(b). In ruling that the FTCA’s statute of limitations is eligible for equitable tolling, the Court rejected the government’s argument that equitable tolling doesn’t apply because the limitations period is nonjurisdictional. The Ninth Circuit recognized “some tension between Wong’s reasoning and the analysis underlying Ninth Circuit precedent interpreting the jurisdictional nature of the QTA’s statute of limitations,” but concluded the cases were not “clearly irreconcilable.”

The landowners contend that Block is not controlling precedent because it did not analyze whether the QTA’s time-bar is jurisdictional and instead made “one passing reference to jurisdiction” in its conclusion, upon which courts have relied too heavily. The landowners also argue that circuit courts treating the limitations period as jurisdictional have erroneously justified their conclusions on the waiver of sovereign immunity in the QTA. The landowners assert that sovereign immunity is “irrelevant because this Court ‘treat[s] time bars in suits against the Government . . . the same as in litigation between private parties.’” The landowners also assert that the Court has established “’that most time bars are nonjurisdictional’” “absent a clear statement from Congress to the contrary.” In their opinion, the QTA lacks a clear statement of jurisdiction given its “mundane” language, especially as compared to the “forever barred” language analyzed and declared nonjurisdictional in Wong.  They further contend that labeling the time limit jurisdictional has “harsh consequences” and led the district court to improperly place the burden on them to show that the complaint was timely, and to grant the motion to dismiss without resolving disputed facts.

The government argues that the Ninth Circuit properly applied the principles of statutory interpretation and correctly concluded that the landowners’ claims were time-barred because they “knew of the public’s use of the roadway when they acquired their lots.”  It invokes the Court’s jurisprudence that, “[a]lthough Congress must ‘speak clearly’ to give a deadline jurisdictional significance, it need not ‘incant magic words.’” (Citation omitted.)  In its view, Block’s “description of the limitations period as jurisdictional cannot fairly be dismissed as an afterthought” because Block explained how the QTA’s “‘carefully crafted’ scheme” provides the sole means by which adverse claimants can challenge the government’s title to real property, and without which the government would be subject to unending lawsuits.  In addition, the government argues that waiver of sovereign immunity is a “central condition” of the QTA that defines the extent of its jurisdiction and “‘reflects a clear congressional judgment that . . . requires barring stale challenges to the United States’ claim to real property, whatever the merits of those challenges.’”  (Citation omitted.)  As for Wong, the government agrees it neither implicitly nor expressly abrogates Block.

Related Posts

Related Posts

Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 20

Supreme Court Report, Volume 32, Issue 6

Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 15

Connect with NAAG and the Attorney General Community

Create a NAAG account to subscribe to our newsletters or mailing lists.

Create Account
Subscribe
Marble columns and the top of a federal building

scroll to filters

White Logo for the National Association of Attorneys General

1850 M Street NW
12th floor
Washington, DC 20036

TEL 202-326-6000
EMAIL 

Youtube
  • Issues
    • Issues
      • Anticorruption
      • Antitrust
      • Bankruptcy
      • Charities
      • Civil Law
    • Issues
      • Consumer Protection
      • Criminal Law
      • Cyber and Technology
      • Disaster Preparedness & Response
      • Elder Justice
    • Issues
      • Ethics
      • Human Trafficking
      • Medicaid Fraud
      • Opioids
      • Powers & Duties
    • Issues
      • Public Health
      • The U.S. Supreme Court
      • Tobacco
      • Veterans & Military
  • Our Work
    • Training & Research
    • Centers
      • Center for Consumer Protection
      • Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
      • Center for Tobacco & Public Health
    • Committees
    • Initiatives
      • Presidential Initiative
      • Strategic Partnerships
      • International Fellows
      • COVID-19
    • Bankruptcy
    • Policy & Advocacy
  • Events & Training
    • Event Calendar
    • Attorney General Symposium
    • Presidential Summit
    • Capital Forum
    • Region Meetings
    • CLE Credit
    • NAAG Trainings
    • Online Learning
    • NAMFCU Trainings
    • NAAG Faculty
  • News & Resources
    • Attorney General Journal
    • Reports & Publications
    • Newsroom
    • NAAG Policy Letters
    • Podcasts
    • Online Learning
    • Research & Data
    • Member Directory
  • Attorneys General
    • What Attorneys General Do
    • Who is my Attorney General?
    • Attorneys General Office 101
    • Research & Data
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Careers in Attorney General Offices
    • Careers in Medicaid Fraud Control Units
  • About NAAG
    • NAAG Staff
    • NAAG Leadership
    • NAAG Member Services
    • NAAG Regions
    • NAAG FAQs
    • SAGE
    • NAMFCU
    • Newsroom
    • Careers at NAAG
  • Find my AG
  • About NAMFCU
    • About the Medicaid Fraud Control Units
    • Reporting Fraud and Abuse
    • MFCU Member Hub
    • Careers with a MFCU
  • Contact Us
  • Find My AG
  • Consumer Complaints
  • Member Benefits
  • Contact Us
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Privacy & Cookies Notice
  • Sitemap
  • Member Login

About the National Association of Attorneys General

As the nonpartisan national forum for America's state and territory attorneys general and their staff, NAAG provides collaboration, insight, and expertise to empower and champion America's attorneys general.
Learn More

© 2025 Copyright National Association of Attorneys General

Website by Yoko Co

Internal Feedback / Report an Error

Request an Update / Report an Error

The change you are requesting will be linked to this page. The URL for the page will be included in a hidden field when the form is submitted.
Please enter your change or describe your request. Be sure to reference where the error appears on the page and what needs to be done specifically.
Upload any files that need to be linked to this page. PDF only. Submit another request if you have more than five files to upload.
Drop files here or
Accepted file types: pdf, docx, xls, Max. file size: 128 MB, Max. files: 5.

    Who is requesting this change?(Required)

    Scroll To Top

    Insert/edit link

    Enter the destination URL

    Or link to existing content

      No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.
        To provide you more clarity about how we collect, store and use personal information, and your rights to control that information, we have updated our privacy policy, which also explains how we use cookies. You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.I Agree