Case law

First National Bank v. United States

36 F. Supp. 229 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 6, 1941

Bank of Orange v. … In American Cigar Co. v. Commissioner, 66 Fed. (2d) 425, 427, certiorari denied 290 U.

Kalkines v. United States

473 F.2d 1391 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 16, 1973

Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 (1967). … See Gardner v. Broderick, supra, 392 U.S. at 278; Uniformed Sanitation Men Ass’n v.

Pedone v. United States

151 F. Supp. 288 · United States Court of Claims · May 8, 1957

On or about November 25, 1952, the partners entered into a stipulation with the Wage Stabilization Board with respect to the excessive' wage payments. … See Supreme Court discussion in Lilly v. Commissioner, 343 U.S. 90 , 72 S.Ct. 497 , 96 L.Ed. 769 .

Stith v. Office of Personnel Management

231 Ct. Cl. 827 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 16, 1982

This civilian pay case comes before us on respondent’s motion to dismiss for failure to appeal the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (board) within 30 days of its decision, as required by Rule 172(a) and 5 U.S.C … The petition was thus clearly out of time (180 days after the board decision) and so beyond our jurisdiction. Coleman v. Department of the Army, 227 Ct.Cl. 536 (1981).

Ferraro

650 F.2d 288 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 20, 1980

According to plaintiff he did not ask for or have a physical evaluation board at the time of his retirement. He was, however, examined by the Veterans Administration in 1966, 1969 and 1974. … See, e.g., Jordan v. United States, 205 Ct. Cl. 65, 72-73 (1974).

Bianco v. United States

171 Ct. Cl. 719 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 11, 1965

District of Columbia v. Barnes, 197 U.S. 146 ; Cramp v. United States, 239 U.S. 221 ; United States v. Milliken Imprinting Co., 202 U.S. 168 . … In Keim v.

Transwestern Pipeline Co. v. United States

639 F.2d 679 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 19, 1980

E.g., Lucas *416 v. American Code Co., 280 U. S. 445, 449 (1930); Brown v. Helvering, 291 U. S. 193, 203 (1934); Automobile Club of Michigan v. Commissioner, 353 U. … S. 446 (1959) (deduction to establish reserve for anticipated nonperformance of guaranty disallowed); Brown v. Helvering, 291 U.

Dale Construction Co. v. United States, Seaboard Surety Co.

168 Ct. Cl. 692 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 11, 1964

Hollerbach v. United States, 233 U.S. 165 (1914); Christie v. United States, 237 U.S. 234 (1915); Flippin Materials Co. v. United States, 160 Ct. … This the Board does not believe.

Fermont Division, Dynamics Corp. of America

20 Cont. Cas. Fed. 82,972 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 4, 1974

Plaintiff contends that a decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, Fermont Divi sion., Dynamics Corporation of America, 71-2 BCA ¶9022 , is erroneous as a matter of law. … The Board correctly cited, among other cases, Jamsar, Inc. v. United States, 194 Ct. Cl. 819 , 442 F. 2d 930 (1971).

Lester Bros. v. United States

151 Ct. Cl. 536 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 1, 1960

In view of plaintiff’s allegations of arbitrary and capricious conduct by the contracting officer and by the appeals board, and since the appeals board found the termination *538 to have been correct in law, we have granted … See Wunderlich Act, 68 Stat. 81 , 41 U.S.C. §§ 321 , 322 (1958 Ed.) ; Volentine & Littleton v. United States, 136 Ct. Cl. 638 (1956) ; P.L.S. Coat & Suit Corp. v. United States, 148 Ct. Cl. 296 (1960).

Mellinger v. United States

21 F. Supp. 964 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 7, 1938

And the Board of Tax Appeals in San Jacinto Life Ins. Co. v. … Schlemmer v.

Fulmer v. United States

144 Ct. Cl. 812 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 14, 1959

The first was a suit on an unpatented invention for camouflaging parachutes, FuT/iner v. United States, 111 C. Cls. 591 , dismissed June 1, 1948. … The examiner’s rejection was affirmed by the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office.

L. L. Hall Construction Company v. The United States

379 F.2d 559 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 16, 1966

Plaintiff appealed to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals which affirmed that the board was without authority to adjust the contract price to compensate for damages due to a delay. … Co. v.

Lawrenson v. United States

153 F. Supp. 790 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 12, 1957

We quote from a decision in the case of Rafferty v. … The Court, following the rule in Dodge v. Board of Education, 302 U. S. 74, 79 , 58 S. Ct. 98, 100 , 82 L. Ed. 57 , sustained the reduction.

Bankers Trust Co. v. United States

518 F.2d 1210 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 11, 1975

Cl. 184 , 444 F. 2d 557 (1971); Republic Steel Corp. v. United States, 94 Ct. Cl. 476 , 40 F. Supp. 1017 (1941); Annabelle Candy Co. v. Commissioner, 314 F. 2d 1 (9th Cir. 1962); Ullman v. … Davee v. United States, 195 Ct. Cl. 184 , 444 F. 2d 557 (1971); Republic Steel Corp v. United States, 94 Ct. Cl. 476 , 40 F. Supp. 1017 (1941); Annabelle Candy Co. v.

Meredith v. United States

121 F. Supp. 622 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 8, 1954

Defendant cites, in support of its contention that plaintiff’s compensation was properly withheld, the case of Gratiot v. … The case of United States v.

Standard Steel Car Co. v. United States

60 Ct. Cl. 726 · United States Court of Claims · May 11, 1925

And in *745 the case of Nash v. Williams, from which quotation is made in Windsor v. … Chorpenning v. United States, 94 U.

Bradley v. United States

12 Ct. Cl. 578 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 15, 1876

He went on board the Dexter Washburn, then in port with a cargo of sugar on board, took the weights and obtained samples, and then waited until the owners had entered their sugar at the custom-house, when he presented his … (Hooper v. Fifty-one Casks of Brandy, Davies R., 370; Brewster v. Gelston, 11 Johns. R., 390; Sawyer v. Steele, 3 Wash., C. Cls. R., 464.)

Miller v. United States

49 Ct. Cl. 276 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 9, 1914

of officers was, by approval of the Secretary of the Navy, appointed and convened for the purpose of ascertaining the facts in relation thereto, and this board estimated the damage by reason of such delay to the claimant … The case of Cotton v. United States, 38 C. Cls., 536 , is almost identical with this.

Adams v. United States

118 F. Supp. 381 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 2, 1954

On October 10, 1952, the Physical Evaluation Board, in passing on plaintiff’s claim for retirement benefits, found that plaintiff was not physically qualified for active service, and that although he had suffered disability … Saunders v. United States, 85 C. Cls. 300 ; Smith v. United States, 122 C. Cls. 444 . Judgment on this phase of the case will be suspended pending a report from the General Accounting Office showing the amount due.