Case law

Palmer & Sicard, Inc. v. United States

32 Cont. Cas. Fed. 72,874 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 5, 1984

See Paragon Energy *235 Corp. v. United States, 227 Ct.Cl. 176, 184 , 645 F.2d 966, 971 (1981). The complaint in this case, as amended, seeks to assert nine claims against the Government. … Lehman, Inc. v. United States, 230 Ct.Cl. 11, 17 , 673 F.2d 352, 356 (1982); Shelly and Loy, v. United States, 231 Ct.Cl. 370, 372-73 , 685 F.2d 414, 416 (1982).

Nelson v. United States

126 Ct. Cl. 553 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 3, 1953

Poggas v. United States, 118 C. Cls. 385 ; Parmenter v. United States, 125 C. Cls. 35 . … It fixes the workweek of wage-board employees of the United States at forty hours, and provides for one and one-half times the regular rate of pay for work in excess of forty hours.

Kirkendall v. United States

31 F. Supp. 766 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 4, 1940

See Brown et al. v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278 , 56 S.Ct. 461 , 80 L.Ed. 682 , and Chambers et al. v. Florida, 60 S.Ct. 472 , 84 L.Ed. -, decided by the Supreme Court February 12, 1940. … See also Dooley v. United States, 182 U.S. 222 , 21 S.Ct. 762 , 45 L.Ed. 1074 ; Basso v. United States, 239 U.S. 602 , 36 S.Ct. 226 , 60 L.Ed. 462 ; and Bull v. United States, 295 U.S. 247 , 55 S.Ct. 695 , 79 L.

Erie Basin Metal Products, Inc. v. United States

145 F. Supp. 922 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 7, 1956

In Canned Foods v. United States, Ct.Cl., 140 F.Supp. 771 , we held, following Mercoid Corp. v. … The Fifth Circuit ruled to the contrary in United States v. Weaver, 207 F.2d 796 . In Goggin, Trustee v.

Allan Construction Co. v. United States

646 F.2d 487 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 8, 1981

In Re Gravure Paper & Board Corp., 234 F.2d 928 (3d Cir. 1956). … Brown v. Presbyterian Ministers Fund, 484 F.2d 998, 1007 (3d Cir. 1973), and defendant acted on oral instructions received from the trustee’s office.

Blue Bell, Inc. v. United States

556 F.2d 1118 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 8, 1977

The Board has elsewhere recognized that use of rented facilities tends to remove the capital and net worth factor from relevant application. See Butkin Precision Mfg. Co. v. United States, supra. … Co. v.

King

566 F.2d 1189 · United States Court of Claims · May 27, 1977

Defendant’s motion to dismiss supplies us with papers indicating that this could refer to either or both of two separations from the Government — one dismissal was from the Patent Office in 1964 which was upheld by the Board … King v. United States Civil Service Commission, complaint dismissed, E.D.N.Y., Nov. 1, 1974, order affirmed by the Court of Appeals, No. 74-2636, April 28, 1975.

Neufeld v. United States

138 F. Supp. 271 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 31, 1956

Stringer v. United States, 117 C. Cls. 30, 49 . Civil Service Commission, Federal Personnel Manual, p. Sl-29, as set forth in finding 11. We are of the opinion that the notice received here was sufficient. … The suggestion to the contrary in McNulty v. United States, 126 C. Cls. 573 , relative to the non-applicability of section 14 to reclassification proceedings should not be applied too broadly.

American Maritime Transport, Inc. v. United States

35 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,722 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 29, 1989

(AMT) brought this action to recover payment of Operating Differential Subsidy (ODS) by the United States Maritime Administration (MARAD) and Maritime Subsidy Board (MSB or Board) under an Operating Differential Subsidy Agreement … On October 20, 1987, MARAD advised AMT that MARAD’s letter of September 8, 1987 “was not approval by the Maritime Subsidy Board (Board) and should not be taken as indicating the Board’s approval of the payment of subsidy

Boyd International Ltd. v. United States

33 Cont. Cas. Fed. 74,501 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 8, 1986

Cornell Co. v. United States, 179 Ct.Cl. 651 , 376 F.2d 299 (1967) (evidence of trade custom and usage may not be used to vary or contradict contract language); Tibshraeny Brothers Construction, Inc. v. … See, e.g., Southwest Welding & Manufacturing Co. v. United States, 206 Ct.Cl. 857 , 513 F.2d 639 (1975); Gresham & Company, Inc. v.

Daigle v. United States

217 Ct. Cl. 376 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 14, 1978

In Benevento v. … The official or board making the decision should have a proper delegation of authority.

Ocean Drilling & Exploration Co. v. United States

24 Cl. Ct. 714 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 18, 1991

In a December 19, 1968 meeting of Mentor’s board of directors, the chairman of the board stated that this increase in capital was necessary for the insurance business that Mentor was undertaking. … Carnation Co. v.

Hendrix v. United States

555 F.2d 785 · United States Court of Claims · May 18, 1977

board was not used by either side during the phase of the court-martial dealing with guilt or innocence. … Sec McDonald v. United States, 209 Ct. Cl. 62 , 531 F.2d 490 (1976), Gross v. United States, 209 Ct. Cl. 70 , 531 F.2d 482 (1976), Jones v. United States, 205 Ct. Cl. 270 , 499 F.2d 631 (1974).

Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. United States

493 F.2d 1357 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 20, 1974

Brewster v. Gage, 280 U.S. 327 (1930); Cameron v. United States, 231 U.S. 710 (1914). … Maritime Subsidy Board Docket No. CA-43. Now entitled “Chief Administrative Law Judge."

Philadelphia Electric Co. v. United States

117 F. Supp. 424 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 5, 1954

Helvering v. Credit Alliance Co., 316 U. S. 107, 113; Helvering v. Reynolds, 313 U. S. 428 ; Campbell v. Galeno Chemical Co., 281 U. S. 599, 610 ; Eastman Kodak Co. v. United States, 99 C. Cls. 569 . … At a meeting of the Board of Directors of UGI on June 11, 1913, such Board declared the Plan effective as of that date and authorized the redemption of the 765,146 shares of outstanding shares of $5 Dividend Preferred Stock

C. J. Langenfelder & Son, Inc. v. United States

384 F.2d 1005 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 9, 1967

Langenfelder & Son, Inc. v. United States, 169 Ct. … “In United States v.

Baird v. United States

5 Ct. Cl. 348 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 15, 1869

not being satis-' fied on the ground of indemnity claimed under the contract, presented his application to the Department for further allowance and indemnity, and this application was referred by the Secretary of War to a board … In the case of Brown vs. The United States, ( 1 C. Cls.

Men's & Boys' Apparel Club of Florida v. United States

168 Ct. Cl. 147 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 13, 1964

These sections of the Codes exempt: Business leagues, chambers of commerce, real-estate boards, or boards of trade, not organized for profit and no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder … See Evanston-North Shore Board of Realtors v. United States, 162 Ct. Cl. 682 (1963), 320 F. 2d 375 , cert. denied, 376 U.S. 931 (1964); United States v.

Trustees of Indiana University v. United States

618 F.2d 736 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 19, 1980

E.g., Califano v. Yamasaki, 442 U.S. 682 (1979); United States v. Vuitch, 402 U.S. 62 (1971); United States v. Rumely, 345 U.S. 41 (1953). The same principle is equally applicable to administrative regulations. … Cal. 1976) (regulation constitutional; payment for purchase of building from company owned in part by members of hospital board of directors); South Boston Gen. Hosp. v. Blue Cross, 409 F. Supp. 1380 (W.D.

Lowe v. United States

20 Cl. Ct. 693 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 26, 1990

Japanese War Notes Claimants Ass’n v. … Further, this court follows the view that resort to a correction board is a permissive step that does not suspend the running of the statute. Hurick v. Lehman, 782 F.2d 984, 987 (Fed.Cir.1986). .