Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
1,638 results
1.20s
Martin Marietta Corp. v. United States
7 Cl. Ct. 573 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 28, 1985
indication of the depletion percentage to be allowed with respect to the three minerals there enumerated [bromine, calcium chloride, and magnesium chloride] when obtained from brine wells, but it must also be read as a clearly … Accepting this point for discussion’s sake, plaintiffs then face the further difficulty that the magnesium hydroxide price they seek to build upon is not a price that has been competitively established.
Cited 0 timesPublished146 F. Supp. 425 · United States Court of Claims · May 1, 1956
section 1491 of title 28 of the United States Code: Provided, That this Act shall be construed only to waive the defense of lack of authority of the Department of Justice or its officers in making said agreement and the immunity … (a) Plaintiff is the duly qualified administrator of the estate of his father, Robert A.
Cited 1 timesPublishedTown of Fallsburg v. United States
22 Cl. Ct. 633 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 8, 1991
Service Scaffold needed the indemnification in order to qualify for the contract award. … While the amount of the penalty is clearly reviewable by the court for arbitrariness, the court is persuaded that the amount chosen here was not unreasonable.
Cited 6 timesPublishedMagnavox Electronic Systems Co. v. United States
38 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,414 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 9, 1992
Of the producers responding, the agency determined that only Magnavox had the established expertise in the production of proximity type fuzes. … "[Originally,] the procurement was to be accomplished by exercising an option to an existing contract with the only qualified producer, Motorola. Just prior to the award of the option, Desert Storm came to an end.
Called into doubt on other grounds by Motorola, Inc. v. The United States, 988 F.2d 113 (1993)Cited 34 timesPublishedMorrison Assurance Co. v. United States
31 Cont. Cas. Fed. 71,711 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 27, 1983
The fact that there is no takeover agreement does not mean that a surety cannot be deemed a completing surety if it otherwise qualifies for such status. … Again, the agreements of August 21st and August 24th fully protected the government’s interests by keeping a technically qualified but financially troubled contractor on the job until the contract was completed.
Cited 20 timesPublished413 F.2d 556 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 16, 1969
Only officers clearly an assume and discharge duties and responsibilities commensurate with their grade are permitted to continue *613 to serve in that grade. … This is one of the procedures which the Air Force has established to protect individual rights. Another is the Officer Personnel Eecords Eeview Board.
Cited 2 timesPublishedGreen Hospital v. United States
23 Cl. Ct. 393 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 17, 1991
“Medically necessary” services are those “that are generally accepted by qualified professionals to be reasonable and adequate for the diagnosis and treatment of illness, injury, pregnancy, and mental disorders.” 32 C.F.R … Therefore, unless the agency’s interpretation of the CHAMPUS regulations is clearly unreasonable, the court should not disturb it. See United States v.
Cited 6 timesPublishedArmand Edward Blackmar v. The United States
354 F.2d 340 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 17, 1965
In view of the above finding, the record clearly discloses that Mr. Blackmar was properly reached for reduction-in-force action. … In this connection the applicant was serving at the time of his separation under a temporary appointment pending establishment of a register.
Cited 18 timesPublishedCarl H. Wienberg v. The United States
425 F.2d 1244 · United States Court of Claims · May 15, 1970
The IRS appealed this decision to the BAR, which determined on January 26, 1968, that plaintiff had not established his right to be promoted to GS-9 while on military duty. … more than one year— (A) if such position was in the employ of the United States Government, its Territories, or possessions, or political subdivisions thereof, or the District of Columbia, such person shall— (1) if still qualified
Cited 7 timesPublished173 Ct. Cl. 1 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 15, 1965
If either job was held for the 2-year period, then he would qualify under the act. … Plaintiff argues that the Patent Attorney job qualifies him under the act.
Cited 0 timesPublished531 F.2d 515 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 17, 1976
Section 1382(b) allows a nonexempt cooperative to reduce its taxable income by the payment of a qualifying patronage dividend, which is defined in Section 1388(a), quoted above. … Because Congress, in enacting Subchapter T, merely codified the prior administrative practice of the Commissioner, there is little basis on which to conclude that Congress intended to discard the long established method of
Cited 1 timesPublished15 Cl. Ct. 580 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 6, 1988
There are no material issues of fact in dispute and the matter for decision is clearly a question of law. … As a result, prior to February 1, 1983, plaintiffs’ military retired pay was immune from apportionment in divorce proceedings.
Cited 11 timesPublished5 Cl. Ct. 531 · United States Court of Claims · May 31, 1984
This program is designed to provide a highly qualified corps of US Army Reserve (USAR) enlisted personnel to meet support requirements for USAR projects and programs. … This program effective 1 February 1979 establishes: a.
Cited 1 timesPublished8 Cl. Ct. 201 · United States Court of Claims · May 10, 1985
The court found Schumm to be a credible witness, clearly familiar with the region of the Ohio River in question. … The record indicates that the assumptions upon which plaintiffs’ counsel based this calculation are clearly erroneous.
Cited 25 timesPublished16 Cl. Ct. 385 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 2, 1989
If AFM 36-10, 114-7(c) had been meant to apply to the Correction Board, the regulation could have clearly stated so. … Plaintiff bears a heavy burden in establishing bad faith.
Cited 12 timesPublishedGalen H. Clark Packing Co. v. United States
158 Ct. Cl. 93 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 18, 1962
That court held that the “complainant has failed to show facts which so clearly establish a reasonable excuse for failure to file its claim on time and such undue hardship resulting from their nonpayment as would stamp the … It is obvious that the complainant has failed to show facts which so clearly establish a reasonable excuse for failure to file its claim on time and such undue hardship resulting from their nonpayment as would stamp the respondent
Cited 3 timesPublished11 Cl. Ct. 295 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 26, 1986
Bass was the plaintiff in that action, identity is established. 2. … We repeat our observation that the instructions to the jury and the verdict of the jury comport clearly with the facts of this case.
Cited 12 timesPublished154 Ct. Cl. 215 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 7, 1961
However, the record clearly rebuts this contention. … The evidence does not clearly and convincingly establish whether plaintiff’s condition is due to an organic brain injury, or to a psychoneurotic condition, or to both.
Cited 9 timesPublishedPaschen Contractors, Inc. And Peter Kiewit Sons' Co., Joint Venturers v. The United States
418 F.2d 1360 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 12, 1969
Plaintiff submits that the record clearly establishes without dispute that there would have been no condensation or heat gain in the hung ceiling spaces involved in this contract. 6. … Defendant further reasons that the reference to “all supply duets” in the first sentence of paragraph 82 would have been qualified (for example, by the words “in non-conditioned spaces”) had it been intended that the exception
Cited 8 timesPublishedSioux Tribe of Indians v. United States
97 Ct. Cl. 613 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 1, 1942
The court held, at p. 564, that “To uphold the claim would be to adjudge that the indirect operation of the treaty was to materially limit and qualify the controlling authority of Congress in respect to the care and protection … It has not been the practice of Congress in passing Court of Claims bills to authorize the payment of interest, and the conferees finally agreed that it is perhaps not wise to establish a precedent along that line.
Cited 22 timesPublished
Ask Donna