Case law

Parker v. United States

461 F.2d 806 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 16, 1972

To establish a program of Selective Training and Reenlistment incentives for qualified career motivated enlisted men. *664 «2. » * * » * “3. Background. … The incentives in the STAR Program are available to qualified personnel In all ratings.”

Quality Furniture Rentals, Inc. v. United States

30 Cont. Cas. Fed. 70,821 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 15, 1983

This case involves a proposed contract by the Army and Air Force Exchange Services (AAFES) to establish a furniture rental concession at Fort Carson, Colorado. … As has been repeatedly noted, the Claims Court, like its predecessor, is a court of exceedingly limited jurisdiction because the cases before it are brought against the United States and waivers of sovereign immunity must

Lolley v. United States

18 Cl. Ct. 498 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 18, 1989

Immunization records from the Riley County Health Department establish that Johnathan Lolley received a diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus vaccine (hereinafter “DPT”) in the United States, specifically Kansas, thus fulfilling the … Crane was considered qualified to testify as an expert as to the etiology of Johnathan’s illness and subsequent death. Dr.

Edison Sault Electric Co. v. United States

552 F.2d 326 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 23, 1977

immunity, 22 U.S.C. § 288 (1970). … There is no evidence or any claim by plaintiff of any waiver of immunity by I.J.C.

Ottinger v. United States

106 F. Supp. 198 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 15, 1952

It needs no such *201 immunity in order to be able to go on governing wisely and as circumstances require without being hampered 'by its outstanding contracts. … Executive Order No. 9139 dated April 18, 1942, established the War Manpower Commission.

Sogitec, Inc. v. United States

31 Cont. Cas. Fed. 71,229 · United States Court of Claims · May 31, 1983

Where injunctive relief is sought, which relief is drastic in nature, the Court *535 must exercise great caution and even then, the aggrieved bidder should be made to establish its right to such drastic relief by means of … The Department of .Commerce bent over backwards to permit Sogitec to show it was technically qualified to submit an offer.

Sperry Flight Systems Division of Sperry Rand Corp. v. United States

548 F.2d 915 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 26, 1977

Further litigation on the price reasonableness issue, making use of the disclosed cost data, was thus clearly contemplated. … Clearly, the statutory language envisions no mandatory exemption from cost disclosure such as plaintiff claims.

Bennett v. United States

4 Cl. Ct. 330 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 20, 1984

The decision to include the position of deputy marshal in the list of Department of Justice organizations eligible for AUO must be upheld, unless (1) it clearly contradicts the terms or purpose of the statute, or (2) it clearly … The head of an agency is required to establish work schedules.

W. L. Schautz Co. v. United States

567 F.2d 373 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 14, 1977

A winter vacation home is clearly a facility used in connection with an activity generally considered to constitute recreation, entertainment, or similar activity described under the terms of section 274(a)(1). Treas. … Since the loss involved in this case does not qualify as a deductible item, it cannot be offset against other capital gains.

Sun Oil Co. v. United States

514 F.2d 1020 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 16, 1975

sought is clearly sufficient, on balance, to override a claim of privilege, the documents must be produced. … Since a President is not absolutely immune from court process, a former President can claim no greater immunity, and the court must determine whether his claim of privilege, assuming his right to assert it, is overcome by

Pfister v. United States

203 Ct. Cl. 459 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 23, 1974

he was also being considered for promotion was insufficient to qualify under the statute for retirement pay on the basis of the grade to which he would have been promoted. … It is not within the province of this or any court to emasculate a *466 statutory provision so as to reward those clearly not intended to benefit under the statute’s plain language.

Erosion Victims of Lake Superior Regulation v. United States

12 Cl. Ct. 68 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 25, 1987

Along with other such international organizations it is granted certain privileges and immunities, including immunity from suit and all forms of judicial process. 22 U.S.C. § 288a(b). … Mary’s River was “clearly in the hands of the I.J.C.” Edison, 213 Ct.Cl. at 315 , 552 F.2d at 329 . The mere fact that the United States petitioned the IJC to act did not establish agency.

Barbieri v. United States

15 Cl. Ct. 747 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 16, 1988

The order went on to say: “If on the other hand, the claims are factually specific to each class member, as defendant contends, then there is clearly no purpose in granting certification. … In the case last cited, the Court of Claims explained: [t]he directive that waiver of sovereign immunity not be read expansively (e.g. United States v.

Hughes Aircraft Co. v. United States

534 F.2d 889 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 14, 1976

The Weld case itself, which first clearly articulated this principle, provides an apt demonstration of its application. … The first such principle is that the doctrine of sovereign immunity precludes suits 'against the Federal Government unless such immunity has been specifically waived by act of Congress. United States v.

Grav v. United States

14 Cl. Ct. 390 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 4, 1988

If the statute is construed as an offer, then the statute is clearly an Act of Congress mandating payment to plaintiff such as is necessary for jurisdiction to be lodged in this court. … Thus, the court must rely upon an established maxim of statutory construction to determine the will of Congress. The maxim of ejusdem generis applies here.

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community v. United States

26 Cl. Ct. 201 · United States Court of Claims · May 11, 1992

The Settlement Act clearly 4 and solely provided a forum in *204 which the Tribe could present its claims. It did not create or acknowledge a substantive right to relief, as required by Mitchell II. … What is lacking in the perfection of the waiver of sovereign immunity is not jurisdiction in this court, but substance in the plaintiff’s claim.

Shanghai Power Co. v. United States

4 Cl. Ct. 237 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 30, 1983

The possibility that our government would have to intervene to protect American interests in such circumstances was clearly present. … . & Ad.News 6604, 6617 (agreement to arbitrate abroad may constitute implicit waiver of sovereign immunity) [hereinafter cited as H.R.Rep. No. 1487].

Pierce-Arrow Motor Car Co. v. United States

9 F. Supp. 577 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 14, 1935

Witnesses eminently qualified to testify approve and state the right to inventory the steel upon precisely the same valuation basis as merchandise on hand for sale. … It was not an article of merchandise within the category of its established business, nor one which it maintained on hand to sell for profit in its annual business relationship with the public.

Weiss

155 Ct. Cl. 825 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 1, 1961

It qualified the categories for waiver of sovereign immunity as being claims in which “the party would be entitled to redress against the United States either in a court of law, equity, or admiralty if the United States were … Defendant’s contention of governmental immunity from discovery is predicated on the general immunity of the sovereign from suit except upon terms to which it has consented.

Honeywell, Inc. v. United States

35 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,611 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 13, 1989

The Defense Contract Administration Service informed the contracting officer on June 20,1988, that Haz-Tad did not qualify under the Walsh-Healey Act, however, a joint venture among Haz-Tad, Hazeltine and Tadiran would qualify … Accordingly, entitlement to injunctive relief has been established through clear and convincing evidence. See Baird, 1 Cl.Ct. at 664 .