Case law

Universal Restoration, Inc. v. United States

35 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,612 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 19, 1989

This court (White, S.J.) affirmed the Board’s actions. Universal Restoration, Inc. v. United States, 8 Cl.Ct. 510 (1985). On appeal, the Federal Circuit reversed. Universal Restoration, Inc. v. … Devine v. Sutermeister, 733 F.2d at 896 ; accord, Keely v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 793 F.2d 1273, 1276 (Fed.Cir.1986); McCarthy v. United States, 1 Cl.Ct. 446, 459 (1983).

Gellatly v. United States

71 F. Supp. 357 · United States Court of Claims · May 5, 1947

Gellatly requested that she be given a hearing by the Board of Regents, but although she stayed in Washington several days for this purpose, she was never given an opportunity to present her case to the Board. … The Board of Regents did consider a letter and written statement prepared by Mrs. Gellatly. We think the Board would have acted more wisely had they given her a personal hearing but this was not done.

Town Center Management Corp. v. United States

35 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,696 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 21, 1989

North American Corp. v. United States, 706 F.2d 1212 (Fed.Cir.1983). … Vista Scientific Corp. v. United States, 808 F.2d 50, 52 (Fed.Cir.1986). Further, Board findings of fact can only be overturned if not supported by substantial evidence. Id.

Fairfield Scientific Corp. v. United States

655 F.2d 1062 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 1, 1981

The court emphasized that the Board was not authorized or directed to reopen the issues concerning the reprocurement of the defaulted supplies. (Fairfield Scientific Corp. v. United States, 222 Ct. … Plaintiff takes exception to the Board’s dismissal order on the ground that it did not respond to the Board’s April 8 order because it was patiently awaiting receipt from defendant of the documents ordered by the Board on

Guantanamo Sugar Co. v. United States

38 F. Supp. 252 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 7, 1941

Bonwit Teller & Co. v. … See Bull v. United States, 295 U.S. 247 , 55 S.Ct. 695 , 79 L.Ed. 1421 ; Lit v. United States, D.C. E.D.Pa., 18 F.Supp. 435 .

Renicker v. United States

17 Cl. Ct. 611 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 13, 1989

In the instant case, the court is reviewing plaintiff’s separation from active service without military disability benefits “through the prism of a correction board.” Cohn v. United States, 15 Cl.Ct. 778, 789 (1988). … Hary v. United States, 223 Ct.Cl. 10 , 618 F.2d 704 (1980).

Rovina v. United States

33 Cont. Cas. Fed. 74,573 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 3, 1986

See City of Santa Clara v. … , the Board’s decision will be affirmed and the plaintiff’s action in this Court will be dismissed. 41 U.S.C. §§ 321 , 322 (1982); Koppers Co. v.

Elgin Builders, Inc. v. United States

33 Cont. Cas. Fed. 74,381 · United States Court of Claims · May 20, 1986

See, e.g., S.E.R., Jobs For Progress, Inc. v. United States, 759 F.2d 1 (1985). … Company v. United States, 6 Cl.Ct. 298 (1984).

E. W. Bliss Co. v. United States

70 Ct. Cl. 176 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 2, 1930

Charles Nelson Co. v. United States, 56 C. Cls. 448 ; Willard, Sutherland & Co. v. United States, 56 C. Cls. 413 . … Thus in Simons v.

Fred H. Sorrough v. United States

295 F.2d 919 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 1, 1961

Johnson, 316 U.S. 481, 484 , 62 S.Ct. 1168 , 86 L.Ed. 1611 (1942); Siegel v. United States, Ct.Cl. … Carlin v. United States, 100 F.Supp. 451 , 121 Ct.Cl. 643, 660 (1951); Uhley v. United States, 147 F.Supp. 497 , 137 Ct.Cl. 275, 281 (1957); Towell v. United States, Ct.Cl.

Wieman v. United States

678 F.2d 207 · United States Court of Claims · May 5, 1982

Hall’s remark, this incident apparently did not result in any prejudice to the plaintiff and, therefore, does not provide an adequate basis for overturning the decision of the Board. V. … See United States v.

Watson v. United States

12 Cl. Ct. 502 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 19, 1987

See Maier v. … These findings by the Board provide substantial support for affirming the Board’s decision, especially in light of the strong presumption that correction boards faithfully discharge their duties. See Cooper v.

Petrini v. United States

19 Cl. Ct. 41 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 13, 1989

Russell Corp. v. United States, 210 CtCl. 596, 609, 537 F.2d 474, 481-82 (1976), cert denied, 429 U.S. 1073 , 97 S.Ct. 811 , 50 L.Ed.2d 791 (1977); Pacific Gas & Elec. Co. v. … In American General Leasing, Inc. v.

Hoffman v. United States

16 Cl. Ct. 406 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 6, 1989

IV This court has jurisdiction to review a decision of a board of correction for military records having pay consequences. Hertzog v. United States, 167 Ct.Cl. 377, 383-84 (1964). … Where reasonable minds might reach differing conclusions, the court will not sit as a “super correction board” and substitute its judgment for that of the correction boards. See Skinner v.

Purvis

578 F.2d 1389 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 17, 1978

In Paul Hardeman, Inc. v. United States, 186 Ct. … See United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co., 384 U.S. 394, 418-19 (1966). "Plaintiffs request for a quantum decision on the Board record is denied to the extent indicated.

Everett Plywood and Door Corporation v. The United States

419 F.2d 425 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 12, 1969

Co. v. United States, 168 Ct.Cl. 692, 699 (1964), cited with approval in Paccon, Inc. v. … In Brawley v.

Cunningham v. United States

161 Ct. Cl. 82 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 6, 1963

She was advised that she had a right to appeal to the Board of Appeals and Review within seven days. The seven days expired on June 20. At that time the grievance committee of the agency was still considering her case. … Under these facts, we think we must overrule the defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, on the authority of Morelli v. United States, this day decided, p. 44. AFM 40-1, E2.2, 1, c(l) (g)-.

Acorn Decorating Corp. v. United States

174 F. Supp. 949 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 13, 1959

United States v. Callahan Walker Construction Co., 317 U.S. 56 ; United States v. Blair, 321 U.S. 730 ; United States v. Holpuch Co., 328 U.S. 234 ; Pyle v. United States, 143 C. Cls. *398 339 ; Henry E. Wile Co. v. … See also Pink v. United States, 85 C.

Browne

618 F.2d 123 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 21, 1979

See Borgford v. United States, 208 Ct. Cl. 1040 (1976); Doggett v. United States, 207 Ct. Cl. 478 (1975); Abruzzo v. United States, 206 Ct. Cl. 731 , 513 F. 2d 608 (1975). … Doggett at 482 ; Selman v. United States, 204 Ct. Cl. 675 , 498 F. 2d 1354 (1974).

Zidell Explorations, Inc. v. The United States

427 F.2d 735 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 12, 1970

United States v. Blair, 321 U.S. 730 , 64 S.Ct. 820 , 88 L.Ed. 1039 (1944); United States v. Joseph A. Holpuch Co., 328 U.S. 234 , 66 S.Ct. 1000 , 90 L.Ed. 1192 (1946); Crown Coat Front Co. v. … See, e. g., Robertson Electric Co. v. United States, 176 Ct.Cl. 1287, 1301-1302 (1966); Universal Ecsco Corp. v. United States, 385 F.2d 421, 427 , 181 Ct.Cl. 10, 20-21 (1967); Schlesinger v.