Case law

Eagle v. United States

300 F.2d 765 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 7, 1962

The taxpayer here is a citizen of the United States, and wardship with limited power over his property does not, without more, render him immune from the common burden.” … The first of these, as laid down by the decisions, is that tax exemptions must be clearly expressed and cannot be granted by implication.

Griffin v. United States

215 Ct. Cl. 710 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 22, 1978

. § 1491 , must show a clear-cut entitlement to monetary relief, under law apart from the Tucker Act, the latter simply waiving sovereign immunity and providing the forum for adjudication. … We think clearly, under authority of Berdan and Padbloc, at the end of step 3, the Secretary had become bound by an implied contract.

Deschler v. United States

203 Ct. Cl. 477 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 23, 1974

In these shills, additional reenlistment incentives are clearly needed. … There was no contract right, established actually or-implicitly, which can be vindicated under •the facts of this case. In Parker v.

Selman v. United States

498 F.2d 1354 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 19, 1974

Contrary to defendant’s contention, nothing could be more clearly stated. … The underlying purpose of Public Law 90-179 was to establish incentives deemed necessary by Congress for the creation of a corps of qualified uniformed lawyers to satisfy the rapidly expanding needs of the Navy for quality

Norman v. United States

392 F.2d 255 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 15, 1968

This, we contend, clearly renders the statute unconstitutional and void. … , they are selecting the best of the best qualified.

Widdoss v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services

25 Cl. Ct. 251 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 6, 1992

Prior theories include allergies, immune deficiencies, hyper-thyroidism, overlaying, sleep and rapid eye movement disorders and hemoglobinopathies. … Quigley was qualified by the court as an expert in pathology.

L'Enfant Plaza Properties, Inc. v. United States

645 F.2d 886 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 11, 1981

Instead, section 104(a) clearly states that "[e]xcept as otherwise provided in this Agreement” possession will vest in plaintiff a certain period of time after execution of the lease, (emphasis added). … We interpret "[ejxcept as otherwise provided” to mean that where other lease terms qualify plaintiffs possessory rights, those qualifications will be reflected in the terms of the vesting.

Mitchell v. United States

26 Cl. Ct. 1329 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 30, 1992

The statute of limitations is a condition of the waiver of the immunity of the United States. United States v. Kubrick, 444 U.S. 111, 117 , 100 S.Ct. 352, 356 , 62 L.Ed.2d 259 (1979). … Concluding that ”[t]here is nothing in [the specific statute establishing the discharge review board, 10 U.S.C. § 1553 (Supp.

McCollum v. United States

32 Cont. Cas. Fed. 73,013 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 4, 1984

“[W]e should not expand the boundaries of section 12 to cover territory not necessarily or clearly included within its terms and perimeters.” 661 F.2d at 165 . … Brookfield is no reason to depart from the government’s established method of paying interest under contractual provi *377 sions like GP 25.

Rochester v. United States

18 Cl. Ct. 379 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 10, 1989

She was clearly suffering from some serious physical disturbance. 60 Neither indicator is consistent with SIDS’ characteristics. … Such an enigmatic result clearly was not contemplated by the statute.

Baltimore Baseball Club, Inc. v. United States

481 F.2d 1283 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 13, 1973

Further, the payments in the year of sale do not exceed 30 percent of the selling price; in fact, plaintiff clearly comes within the terms of section 453(b) (2) (A) (i) as no payments were received in the taxable year of … Finally, the Government argues that, even if the Begulation were to apply to the instant case, plaintiff could not prevail in its motion for summary judgment because of its failure to establish that as of October 31,1968,

Eubanks v. United States

25 Cl. Ct. 131 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 23, 1992

immunity and consented to be sued. … revisit prior decisions of its own or of a coordinate court in any circumstance, although as a rule courts should be loathe to do so in the absence of extraordinary circumstances such as where the initial decision was ‘clearly

Diamond v. United States

176 Ct. Cl. 1103 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 15, 1966

that plaintiff was not qualified for military service by reason of duodenal ulcer. … The evidence further clearly shows that he was rejected for such reenlistment by the examining physician as not being physically qualified for service in the Army by reason of physical disabilities incurred in line of duty

In the Matter of Maria Ross, an Infant Under the Age of 14, by Janice Biolzi, Her Parent and Natural Guardian v. The United States

444 F.2d 568 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 14, 1971

On the contrary, the evidence establishes that subsequent to the time plaintiff and Mr. … This does not mean that the Government is completely immunized from suit under the Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance Act.

Batchelor v. United States

169 Ct. Cl. 180 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 22, 1965

The Court’s decision in that case clearly placed the removal of executive department employees within the ambit of executive discretion, and ruled that until Congress, by “special and direct legislation makes provisions to … Seaton, 359 U.S. 535 (1959), the Supreme Court pointed out that Vitarelli, an Interior Department employee who had failed to qualify under the above provisions, “could have been summarily discharged by the Secretary at any

Powers v. United States

176 Ct. Cl. 388 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 10, 1966

Summary of Regulations Establishing Physical Standards for Disability Retirement 25. … (g) AE 40-105, October 14, 1942, the regulation which established the specific physical standards, provided that an officer was not qualified for active service if he had osteoarthritis of the spinal column; disease of the

Castillo Morales v. United States

19 Cl. Ct. 342 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 1, 1990

A claimant must, therefore, look beyond the Tucker Act to establish an express waiver of sovereign immunity with respect to his claim. Connolly, 716 F.2d at 885 . … Even if the complaint is construed to state a tax refund claim, it clearly alleges much more.

George W. Sturm, Doing Business as George W. Sturm Associates v. The United States

421 F.2d 723 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 20, 1970

Thus, the board decisions tell us, at most, that we must look to the precise language employed in the contract, which in this case clearly embraces plaintiff’s interpretation within its sweep. … contract, subject to appropriate adjustment when final rates have been established for such ■ period. 2 .

New Mexico v. United States

11 Cl. Ct. 429 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 30, 1986

The purpose of the tax was clearly defined to aid the country’s energy demand. … The exemption for a “qualified governmental interest” warrants discussion.

Tri-Ad Constructors v. United States

36 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,965 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 9, 1990

In response, defendant disputes that the April 14, 1988, letter qualifies as a claim under Section 605(a). … The contractor, however, must clearly commit the claim to the [contracting officer] for a final decision. Id. at 267 .