Case law

Dunn v. United States Department of Agriculture

654 F.2d 64 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 17, 1981

United States v. King, 394 U.S. 1, 4 (1960); United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 399-400 (1976); United States v. Mescalero Apache Tribe, 207 Ct. Cl. 369 , 518 F.2d 1309 (1975), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 911 (1976). … Also, in Koehring Co. v. Hyde Constr.

Carmean v. United States

4 Cl. Ct. 181 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 23, 1983

The leading case is United States v. … See also, Boeving v. United States, 650 F.2d 493 (8th Cir.1981); Fleming v. United States, 648 F.2d 1122 (7th Cir.1981); Lillehei v. Commissioner, 638 F.2d 65 (8th Cir.1981); Millette & Assoc., Inc. v.

Kaminer Construction Corp. v. United States

488 F.2d 980 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 19, 1973

Co. v. United States, 149 Ct. Cl. 514, 518 (1960); see also Allied Contractors, Inc. v. United States, 176 Ct. Cl. 1095, 1098-99 (1966); Carlo Bianchi & Co. v. United States, 167 Ct. … Corp v. United States, 159 Ct.

Yee v. United States

512 F.2d 1383 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 19, 1975

Orloff v. Willoughby, 345 U.S. 83 (1953); Brenner v. United States, 202 Ct. Cl. 678 (1973), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 831 (1974); Muldonian v. United States, 193 Ct. Cl. 99 , 432 F. 2d 443 (1970); Clinton v. … . § 5706 provides that a Selection Board be furnished “the records of all officers whose names are furnished to the board.” As we stated in Weiss v. United States, 187 Ct.

Santa Fe Engineers, Inc. v. United States

677 F.2d 876 · United States Court of Claims · May 5, 1982

. v. … Coil v. United States, 227 Ct. Cl. 595 (1981). Tuttle/White Constructors, Inc. v. United States, 228 Ct. Cl. 354 , 656 F.2d 644 (1981). 41 U.S.C.§ 609 (Supp. III 1979). 41 U.S.C. § 605 (a) (Supp.

Webb v. United States

21 Cl. Ct. 137 · United States Court of Claims · Aug 16, 1990

Japanese War Notes Claimants Ass’n v. … The parties have not provided any law on this subject. 3 A recent case, Brown v.

J. D. Hedin Construction Company, Inc. v. The United States

408 F.2d 424 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 14, 1969

The Board, we think, failed to recognize that a default-termination is a drastic sanction (see Schlesinger v. … Co. v. United States, 168 Ct.Cl. 692 (1964) ; Acme Process Equip. Co. v.

Barnes v. United States

163 Ct. Cl. 321 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 13, 1963

Service v. Dulles, 354 U.S. 363 (1957) ; Cravens v. United States, 124 Ct. Cl. 415 (1953). … Friedman v. United States, 159 Ct. Cl. 1, 10 , 310 F. 2d at 387 (1962), cert. denied, 373 U.S. 932 . Though we have held that a later Board can overrule an earlier Board, Spencer v. United States, 121 Ct.

Waterman, Largen & Co., Inc. v. The United States

419 F.2d 845 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 14, 1969

On July 21, 1961, one month after the termination of its agency, the stock was sold to Brown at such price, resulting in a $75,000 loss. … Chase Candy Co. v. United States, 126 F.Supp. 521 , 130 Ct.Cl. 102 (1954); Duffey v. Lethert, 11 A.F.T.R. 2d 1317 (D.Minn.1963).

Cason v. United States

471 F.2d 1225 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 18, 1973

On recommendation of the Judge Advocate General and the Secretary of the Navy, the case was returned to the Discharge Review Board to ascertain whether the Board had followed the command of Harmon v. … Cl. 36 (1965) ; Smith v. United States, 155 Ct. Cl. 682 (1961). In the case of Oornn v.

Sunswick Corporation v. United States

75 F. Supp. 221 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 5, 1948

In York Engineering Co. v. … (or of the Wage Adjustment Board when acting for it), being nonenforceable (see National War Labor Board v.

Wesolowski v. United States

174 Ct. Cl. 682 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 18, 1966

Cl. 655 (1953); Holliday v. United States, 128 Ct. Cl. 647 (1954); Beamish v. United States, 130 Ct. Cl. 767 , 128 F. Supp. 158 (1955); Wales v. United States, supra; Prichard v. United States, 133 Ct. Cl. 212 , 135 F. … Supp. 420 (1955); Towell v. United States, 150 Ct. Cl. 422 (1960); Furlong v. United States, 153 Ct. Cl. 557 (1961); Thompson v. United States, 156 Ct. Cl. 158 (1962); and Johnston v. United States, 157 Ct.

Laws v. United States

27 Ct. Cl. 69 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 14, 1891

In the case of Brown v. The United States ( 18 C. Cls. … And in the case of Young v. The United States ( 19 C. Cls.

Girault v. United States

135 F. Supp. 521 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 8, 1955

We held in Spencer v. United States, supra, and Carlin v. … Plaintiff’s later request for review by the Disability Review Board did not toll the statute. See also Mistretta v. United States, 120 F.Supp. 264 , 128 Ct.Cl. 41 , *527 45. Cf. Louis Rosnick v.

Evensen v. United States

654 F.2d 68 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 1, 1981

As well as in the cases following Sanders, e.g., Hary v. United States, 223 Ct. Cl. 10 , 618 F.2d 704 (1980); Grieg v. United States, 226 Ct. Cl. 258 , 640 F.2d 1261 (1981). … Our determination that plaintiff effectively sought voiding by the Correction Board of the prior passovers removes this case from our holdings in DeBow v. United States, 193 Ct.

James L. Hamlin v. The United States

391 F.2d 941 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 15, 1968

Defendant has cited McMullen v. … In the instant case, the Correction Board was the first board to consider plaintiff’s claim, and the case is governed by Harper v.

Towell v. United States

150 Ct. Cl. 422 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 8, 1960

Holliday v. United States, 128 Ct. Cl. 647 ; Prichard v. United States, 133 Ct. Cl. 212 ; O'Brien v. United States, 124 Ct. Cl. 655 . … Boraiko v. United States, 146 Ct. Cl. 814 ; Tentative War Department Technical Manual 12-245, October 1, 1945. Plaintiff points to AR. 605-250 which states: a. Character.

Conlin v. United States

146 F. Supp. 833 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 5, 1956

Rosnick v. United States, 132 C. Cls. 1 ; Girault v. United States, 133 C. Cls. 135 ; Duff v. United States, 133 C. Cls. 161 ; Odell v. United States, 134 C. Cls. 634 ; Levine v. United States, 133 C. … Cls. 774 ; Soukaras v. United States, 135 C. Cls. 88 . Plaintiff’s application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records would not toll the running of the statute of limitations. Cuiffo v.

Roos v. United States

31 F. Supp. 144 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 5, 1940

However, as pointed out in Lehigh Portland Cement Co. v. … Lehigh Portland G ¡sent Co. v. United States, supra.

Price v. United States

149 F. Supp. 181 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 6, 1957

Moreover, plaintiff’s right to sue in this court accrued, if at all, when the Disposition Board on June 30, 1945, found her fit for general duty, instead of ordering her before a Retiring Board. MacFarlane v. … Cls. 755 ; Girault v. United States, 133 C. Cls. 135 ; Odell v. United *687 States, 134 C. Cls. 634 ; Rosnick v. United States, 132 C. Cls. 1 , rehearing denied 132 C. Cls. 6 .