based on any language in the Tucker Act granting such exclusive jurisdiction to the [Court of Federal Claims], Rather, that court’s jurisdiction is ‘exclusive’ only to the extent that Congress has not granted any other court authority to hear the claims that may be decided by the [Court of Federal Claims]”). Second, the Federal Tort Claims Act (“FTCA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)(1), waives sovereign immunity as to claims arising in tort. The FTCA provides that district courts have jurisdiction in suits against the United States for claims for injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment, under circumstances where the United St th Cir.1963) (<HOLDING>). As we explained in Wood- Many breaches of
holding that a developers claim for breach of fiduciary duty was actually a contract action properly brought in the court of claims holding that breach of fiduciary duty claim was preempted by fehba holding a cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty will not lie where the claim of breach is dependent upon the existence of a contractual relationship between the parties holding that a plaintiff seeking individual relief under erisa  502a3 under a breach of fiduciary duty theory did not have a cause of action when the alleged breach of fiduciary duty was a failure to distribute benefits in accordance with the plan holding that plaintiffs were entitled to a jury trial on claim of breach of fiduciary duty where underlying claim was a common law negligence action