Cite as: 536 U. S. 129 (2002)
Opinion of the Court
To answer the question presented—when does the statute of limitations on petitioners' claims begin to run, see Pet. for Cert. i—we need not separately address petitioners' alternative theory of recovery based on the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The Federal Circuit's holding that takings relief was time barred hinged entirely on its conclusion that petitioners' contract claims accrued upon passage of ELIHPA. See 240 F. 3d, at 1365-1366. Because that conclusion was incorrect, we hold, the Federal Circuit erred in dismissing petitioners' takings theory on grounds of untimeliness.
* * *
Concluding that each petitioner's claim is timely if filed within six years of a wrongly rejected tender of prepayment, we reverse the judgments of the Federal Circuit and remand the Franconia and Grass Valley cases reviewed herein for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
It is so ordered.
149Page: Index Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Last modified: October 4, 2007