if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred. It is well established that where a tort claim stems from a breach of contract, the cause of action is ultimately one arising in contract, and thus is properly within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims to the extent that damages exceed $10,000. See Wood v. United States, 961 F.2d 195, 198 (Fed.Cir.1992) (upholding a transfer of the plaintiffs claims from the district court to the United States Claims Court on the ground that negligence and conversion claims could not establish a cause of action in tort independent of the underlying contractual relationship); Blanchard v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co., 341 F.2d 351 (5th Cir.1965) (<HOLDING>); Woodbury v. United States, 313 F.2d 291, 295
holding that section 2675a was satisfied by an administrative claim which identified the claimant the date of the incident the location of the incident the government agency involved and the type of injury alleged even if the claim did not specifically mention the ftca negligence or tort holding ftca claim barred bivens claim the moment judgment was entered against the government holding that a negligence claim is not a personal injury tort claim recognizing federal constitutional claim against the united states holding that the plaintiffs claim against the united states for negligence was not a tort claim within the ftca where it was founded upon an alleged failure to perform explicit or implicit contractual obligations