Case law

Davenpoet v. United States

31 Ct. Cl. 430 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 29, 1896

(Brown v. Fullerton, 13 Mees. & Wels., 556.) … (Carne v. Malins, 6 L. & Eq., 568.)

CLIMATIC RAINWEAR, CO. v. United States

88 F. Supp. 415 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 6, 1950

King v. United States, 37 Ct.Cl. 428, 436 ; Standard Dredging Co. v. United States, 71 Ct.Cl. 218, 246-249 ; Phoenix Bridge Co. v. United States, 85 Ct.Cl. 603, 629 ; Zweig Co. v. … The time within which to appeal was tolled during this entire period, and plaintiff’s appeal on May 9, 1945, to the Board of Contract Appeals was timely made, Cf. United States v.

Campeau Tool & Die Co.

650 F.2d 287 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 18, 1980

. §§321 , 322, of a decision by the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA), ASBCA Nos. 18436 and 18681, 76-1 BCA ¶ 11,653 (1976). … Kalvar Corp. v. United States, 211 Ct.

Pope v. United States

75 Ct. Cl. 436 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 6, 1932

Maryland Steel Co. v. United States, 235 U. S. 451 . … Mc Closkey v. United States, 66 C. Cls. 105 ; Carroll et al. v. United States, No. C-1236, decided by this court May 2, 1932.

Holbrook v. United States

229 Ct. Cl. 604 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 17, 1981

This court has long held that resort to permissive administrative procedures such as petition to a correction board does not toll the statute of limitations. See, e.g., Brundage v. United States, 205 Ct. … Supp. 445 (1959), for the proposition that a new cause of action arises from the arbitrary and capricious failure of a correction board to correct a serviceman’s date of discharge. As we noted in Brownfield v.

Orbas & Associates v. United States

38 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,373 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 16, 1992

Boeing Co. v. United States, 26 Cl.Ct. 257 at 259 , (1992); Mendenhall v. United States, 20 Cl.Ct. 78, 82 (1990); Claude E. Atkins Enters. v. United States, 15 Cl.Ct. 644, 646 (1988). … Vemo Co. v. United States, 9 Cl.Ct. 217, 222 (1985).

Sylvia Bennett v. The United States

356 F.2d 525 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 18, 1966

The Navy did all that was required of it by the decisions in Service v. Dulles, supra, and Vitarelli v. … In Vitarelli v.

Reele

566 F.2d 1188 · United States Court of Claims · May 13, 1977

United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392 (1976). … See, Abruzzo v. United States, 206 Ct. Cl. 731 , 513 F.2d 608 (1975).

William Jackson, Jr. v. The United States

297 F.2d 939 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 4, 1962

McMullen v. United States, 100 Ct.Cl. 323 , cert. denied 321 U.S. 790 , 64 S.Ct. 786 , 88 L.Ed. 1080 . … Thus, it can readily be seen that the Correction Board did give consideration to plaintiff’s reasons for believing that he should be reinstated. However, as stated by this court in Peterson v.

RC Owen Company v. United States

180 F. Supp. 369 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 3, 1960

The general rule was well stated in Lee Telephone Co. v. … The Supreme Court had this subject for consideration in the case of John Kelley Company v. Commissioner, 326 U.S. 521, 698 , 66 S.Ct. 299 , 90 L.Ed. 278 with which the case of Talbot Mills v.

Rosnick v. United States

132 F. Supp. 478 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 12, 1955

Although plaintiff’s petition was filed prior to this court’s decision in Uhley v. United States, 121 F.Supp. 674 , 128 Ct. … It was further pointed out that the facts as disclosed by the petition negated any possible claim of arbitrary action on the part of the Correction Board.

Warren G. Schaller v. The United States

311 F.2d 796 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 11, 1963

It is defendant’s position that plaintiff is entitled to recover only back pay between the date of separation and the date of re-employment by the Renegotiation Board, exclusive of legislative and in-grade increases, and … O’Brien v. United States, 124 Ct.Cl. 655 . See also Order in Cathie Lee Clark v. United States, No. 464-58, entered January 19, 3962.

Herrnstein v. United States

18 F. Supp. 953 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 26, 1937

On December 2, 1919, the Board of Directors adopted a resolution, subject to *958 the approval of the stockholders, directing the discontinuánce of operations by February 1, 1920, and the subsequent sale of the plant. … See Clarke v. Haberle Crystal Springs Brewing Co., 280 U. S. 384 , 50 S.Ct. 155 , 74 L.Ed. 498 ; Renziehausen v. Lucas, 280 U.S. 387 , 50 S.Ct. 156 , 74 L.Ed. 501 ; Rockwood, Trustee, v.

Matthiessen v. United States

65 Ct. Cl. 484 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 16, 1928

Plaintiff appealed to the Board of Tax *494 Appeals, and that board, in a well-considered opinion, reduced plaintiff’s income-tax liability to $23,316.32. … United States v. Jones, 236 U. S. 106, 112 .

North American Neuchatel Rock Paving Co. v. District of Columbia

16 Ct. Cl. 593 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 15, 1880

We answer that they are merely written evidences of money owing ' *599 to tbe claimant under a contract between it and tbe defendant represented by tbe board of public works. 2. … In argument tbe claimant’s counsel urged that this case is controlled by tbe decision of tbe Supreme Court of tbe United States in Cowdrey v. Yandenburgh ( 101 U. S.

Globe, Inc. v. United States

227 Ct. Cl. 784 · United States Court of Claims · May 29, 1981

Plaintiffs sued in the United States District Court, naming the bank board, GSA, and Crown Book Corporation, as defendants. … Southern California Financial Corp. v. United States, 225 Ct.Cl. 104 , 634 F.2d 521 (1980), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 937 (1981).

Prineville Sawmill Co. v. United States

34 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,425 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 15, 1988

The advertisement for the South Crater Salvage Timber Sale stated that the sale consisted of “an estimated 10,450 M Board feet [M board feet means thousand board feet; hereinafter also referred to as “MBF”] of live and dead … ponderosa pine, 3,650 M board feet of live and dead lodge-pole pine, and 290 M board feet of white fir and others marked or otherwise designated for cutting.”

Allen & Whalen of Virginia, Inc. v. The United States

347 F.2d 992 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 16, 1965

In a recent case, General Bronze Corp. v. … It is concluded therefore that the decision of the Board dismissing plaintiff’s appeal was substantially supported by the record as a whole and cannot be overturned. Carlo Bianchi and Co., Inc. v. United States, Ct.Cl.

Wiggins

650 F.2d 291 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 5, 1980

Eurell v. United States, 215 Ct. Cl. 273 , 566 F.2d 1146 (1977). … Kirby v. United States, 201 Ct. Cl. 527 (1973), cert. denied, 417 U.S. 919 (1974).

American Diversified Corp. v. United States

609 F.2d 442 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 17, 1979

Co. v. United States, 209 Ct. Cl. 223, 256 , 531 F.2d 993, 1011 (1976). … Rated orders Obtained from Renegotiation Board Figures.