Case law

Pickley v. United States

46 Ct. Cl. 77 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 16, 1911

The claimant was charged upon this contract for about two and one-fourth months’ extra inspection and superintendence.charges and board, or $458.67. … (Glavey v. United States, 182 U. S., 595, 607-608 ; Fire Insurance Association v. Wickham, 141 U. S., 579 ; *92 Bostwick v. United States, 94 U. S., 58 ; 12 C. Cls., 68 ; Kiskadden v. United States, 44 C.

MacInnis v. United States

75 Ct. Cl. 538 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 6, 1932

In support of the first point the defendant cites the cases of Lawless v. United States, 59 C. Cls. 224 , and Garrison v. United States, 59 C. Cls. 919 . … Cumming v. United States, 130 U. S. 452 . The defense of the statute of limitation can not be sustained.

Judkins

650 F.2d 286 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 14, 1980

Finally, the Appeals Review Board refused to reconsider plaintiffs case. Plaintiff complains that since the Bureau failed to provide him with the required 60-day notice, its actions were not in accordance with law. … See Grover v. United States, 200 Ct. Cl. 337 (1973); Armstrong v. United States, 186 Ct. Cl. 53 , 405 F.2d 1275 , cert. denied, 395 U.S. 934 (1969) (showing of bias or malice required).

Horst v. United States

64 Ct. Cl. 449 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 16, 1928

Horst v. United States, No. E-89, this day handed down, ante, p. 433. It is unnecessary to restate them here. From the E. … The dividend so declared on February 28, 1919, was ordered by the board of directors to be paid from profits accumulated prior to March 1, 1918, and on February 21, 1919, to be paid from earnings March 1, 1913, to the date

Zonolite Co. v. United States

149 F. Supp. 953 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 3, 1957

During the intervening century, courts have required inventive genius, Reckendorfer v. Faber, 92 U. S. 347, 357 ; flash of thought, Densmore v. Scofield, 102 U. S. 375, 378 ; intuitive genius, Potts v. Creager, 155 U. … As stated in Brown, et al. v. Brock et al., 112 U. S. P.

Computer Products International, Inc. v. United States

39 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,626 · United States Court of Claims · May 29, 1992

In Gunn-Williams v. … Co. v.

Estate of Plumb v. United States

668 F.2d 1217 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 13, 1982

The first was Fahnestock v. United States, 119 Ct. Cl. 41 , 95 F. Supp. 232 (1951). … If the estate files a petition with the Board, it may be very much longer than three or four years after the filing of the return before the Board or the courts to which appeals are taken render a final decision. "(5) A provision

Great Western Steel, Inc. v. United States

31 Cont. Cas. Fed. 71,582 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 3, 1983

See Yachts America, Inc. v. United States, 3 Cl.Ct. 447 at 449 (1983); American Hoist & Derrick, Inc. v. United States, 3 Cl.Ct. 198 at 201 (Cl.Ct. 1983); Cecile Industries, Inc. v. … Anthony Grace & Sons, Inc. v. United States, 193 Ct.Cl. 248, 253-55 , 433 F.2d 766, 768-69 (1970).

Ray v. United States

144 Ct. Cl. 188 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 3, 1958

The Commission’s Board of Appeals and Review in a letter dated June 15, 1957, informed plaintiff’s counsel that proper procedure had been followed in Mr. … United States v. Abilene & Southern Railway Company, et al., 265 U. S. 274 .

Mills v. United States

124 Ct. Cl. 782 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 7, 1953

Each case must be decided upon its own facts and circumstances, Odlin v. United States, 74 C. Cls. 633, 636 . … Mills did not pay any room and board, as such, while there but spent money for her daughter and her grandchildren during this period.

Leverette v. United States

159 F. Supp. 591 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 5, 1958

The Supreme Court in its *556 discussion of this question in Board of Commissioners v. United States, 308 U.

Jones v. United States

3 Cl. Ct. 4 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 11, 1983

Miller v. United States, 620 F.2d at 840 ; Georgia Pacific Corp. v. United States, 640 F.2d 328, 367 , 226 Ct.Cl. 95 (Ct.Cl.1980); Berenholz v. United States, 1 Cl.Ct. 620 (1982). In Foster v. … No. 92-41 ( 85 Stat. 97 ) for the Renegotiation Board.

Ferris v. United States

135 F. Supp. 286 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 8, 1955

The instant case seems to us to be controlled by this court’s decision in Trust Company of Georgia v. The United States, 104 C. Cls. 150 . … The Board of Directors of The Matheson Company, Inc., consisted of plaintiff; a close friend, William B. Mehler; and his brother, Leonard W. Ferris.

Lincoln v. United States

50 Ct. Cl. 70 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 11, 1915

This trust-fund doctrine was recognized in the Villalonga case, supra; Lamar v. Browne, 92 U. S., 187 ; and in Intermingled Cotton cases, 92 U. S., 651 . … McElwee v. Metropolitan Lumber Co., 69 Fed., 302 ; Bohn Manufacturing Co. v. Haynes, 83 Wis., 388 ; *78 Arnold v. Delano, 4 Cush., 33 ; Conrad v. Fischer, 37 Mo. App., 352 ; Cragin v. O'Connell, 63 N. Y.

Mitchell

207 Ct. Cl. 981 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 25, 1975

See Burkett v. United States, 185 Ct. Cl. 631 , 402 F.2d 1002 (1968). … Under the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in Arnett v.

Nock v. United States

2 Ct. Cl. 451 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 15, 1866

solicitor that “the authority conferred upon the court to settle this claim according to principles of justice and equity does not authorize the court to disregard plain principles of law,” and he cites the ease of De Groot v. … In Brown & Oo.’s case (10. 01s. B.., p. 377) it was decided that official documents need not be produced in evidence, but their contents must be shown by authenticated copies, and not by parol.

Moore v. United States

10 F. Supp. 143 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 4, 1935

The questions presented in this case have been decided by the United States Board of Tax Appeals in favor of the Government in Erskine M. Ross, by Oscar Lawler and Robert E. Ross, Executors, v. Commissioner, 29 B. T. … Ross v. Commissioner, supra; George W. Williams, Executor, Estate of Francis Williams, v. Commissioner, 30 B. T. A. 1346.

Walsh v. United States

102 F. Supp. 589 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 5, 1952

102 F.Supp. 589 (1952) WALSH et al. v. UNITED STATES. No. 49274. United States Court of Claims. Decided February 5, 1952. *590 Solomon Dimond, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff. John J. McGinty, Washington, D. … Inc. v. United States, 70 F.Supp. 126 , 108 Ct.Cl. 193 and cases there cited. We think the doctrine is not applicable here.

Ocean Technology, Inc. v. United States

36 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,783 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 18, 1990

In United States v. … As stated in Prestex, Inc. v.

Hemby v. United States

185 Ct. Cl. 140 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 17, 1968

The Commissioners sustained the Board of Appeals and Eeview on August 23,1966. … V. Mildred Hemby and Joseph Hemby No.