Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filterscc

6,266 results

2.23s

  • O'Hanlon v. United States

    7 Cl. Ct. 204 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 10, 1985

    See Kominers v. United States, 3 Cl.Ct. 684 (1983); Cooke v. United States, 1 Cl.Ct. 695 (1983); Crone v. United States, 210 Ct.Cl. 499 , 538 F.2d 875 (1976); Clincher v. … See Louisiana-Pacific Corp. v. United States, 228 Ct.Cl. 363 , 656 F.2d 650 (1981); Christie v. United States, 207 Ct.Cl. 333 , 518 F.2d 584 (1975); Perlman v.

    Cited 19 timesPublished
  • National Cash Register Co. v. United States

    10 F. Supp. 687 · United States Court of Claims · May 6, 1935

    Hudson Motor Company v. United States, 3 F. Supp. 834 , 78 Ct. Cl. 117 . … The board of directors of the plaintiff under the terms of the trust had the right to direct the trustee to relinquish the stock and the cash but solely for the benefit of the employees.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Yaist v. United States

    17 Cl. Ct. 246 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 12, 1989

    On February 15, 1980, Judge Browne issued 61 findings of fact and an opinion holding that Yaist was the equitable owner of the subject property, entitling him just compensation. Yaist v. … Yaist v. United States, 228 Ct.Cl. at 299 , 656 F.2d at 628 (emphasis added). The appellate division also approved the findings of Judge Browne with minor modifications. See Yaist v.

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Michigan Iron & Land Co. v. United States

    10 F. Supp. 563 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 8, 1935

    No appeal was taken to the Board of Tax Appeals from-that determination, and the taxes were assessed and paid. … Cleveland Automobile Co. v. United States (C. C. A.) 70 F.(2d) 365 .

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Data Transformation Corp. v. United States

    34 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,338 · United States Court of Claims · Aug 19, 1987

    See Eastern Canvas Products Inc. v. Brown, 432 F.Supp. 568, 571-72 (D.D.C.1977); Valley Forge Flag Co. v. Kleppe, 506 F.2d 243, 245 (D.C.Cir.1974). … See Ray Baillie Trash Hauling, Inc. v. Kleppe, supra, 477 F.2d at 709 ; Eastern Canvas Products, Inc. v. Brown, supra, 432 F.Supp. at 571-72 .

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • Montgomery Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. United States

    615 F.2d 1318 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 20, 1980

    The minutes of the board of directors, dated September 17, 1958, show the rent for the tangible assets separately from the franchise (gallonage) rent. … Sellers v. Commissioner, 218 F. 2d 380 (9th Cir. 1955). See Sumter Coca-Cola v.

    Cited 50 timesPublished
  • Cecile Industries, Inc. v. United States

    35 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,756 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 22, 1989

    Plaintiff initially appealed the termination to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, but has since withdrawn the appeal. … Mega Construction Co. v. United States, 14 Cl.Ct. 555 (1988); Ralcon, Inc. v. United States, 13 Cl.Ct. 294 (1987).

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Motto v. United States

    360 F.2d 643 · United States Court of Claims · May 13, 1966

    Motto’s application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records eventually resulted in the determination by the Secretary of the Army on August 17, 1963, that the termination from the service on July 11, 1958, was … In Chicago Great Western Ry. v.

    Cited 24 timesPublished
  • Shaw v. United States

    45 Ct. Cl. 9 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 6, 1909

    When captured the vessel had on board her register, role d’equipage, clearance, invoice, and bill of lading. … In the case of Hooper, administrator, v. United States ( 22 C.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Chesebro v. United States

    21 F. Supp. 407 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 6, 1937

    1922, between plaintiff and the National Fisheries Company under the terms of which plaintiff was employed by the National Fisheries Company for a period of five years (unless such employment should be terminated by the Board … Upon the authority of Robbins v. United States, ante, p. 39, the court decided that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Pototzky v. United States

    8 Cl. Ct. 308 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 3, 1985

    The plaintiff in Godfrey was the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the corporation at issue. He had no office at the corporation and received no salary. … Defendant points out that many of the minutes to the meetings of the Board of Directors indicated that "[g]eneral business matters were discussed at length.”

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Scott v. United States

    78 F. Supp. 811 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 28, 1948

    In the Grey case, supra, the Board of Tax Appeals in constru *816 ing the words “without limitation” at page 243 of 41 B.T.A. uses the following language: “Petitioner argues that the words ‘without limitation’ appearing in … We do not regard the facts and the decision in the case of Commissioner v. Pupin’s Estate, 2 Cir., 107 F.2d 745 applicable to the facts in this case.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • McDonald v. United States

    507 F.2d 1271 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 18, 1974

    Dempsey, supra, [ 261 U.S. 86 (1923)], that the proceeding is more a spectacle (Rideau v. Louisiana, 373 U.S. 723, 726 ) or trial by ordeal (Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278, 285 ) than a disciplined contest. … See Burns v.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Marcos v. United States

    106 F. Supp. 172 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 15, 1952

    Hanger v. Abbott, 6 Wall. 532 , 18 L.Ed. 939 ; Greenwald v. Appel, C.C., 17 F, 140. … As this position has been consistently followed by the Supreme Court, Brown v. Hiatts, 15 Wall. 177 , 21 L.Ed. 128 ; Semmes v. Hartford Insurance Co., 13 Wall. 158 , 20 L.Ed. 490 ; Braun v.

    Overruled in part, on other grounds by Compania Maritima v. United States, 145 F. Supp. 935 (1956)Cited 44 timesPublished
  • Tektronix, Inc. v. United States

    575 F.2d 832 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 19, 1978

    Trial Judge Browne has now rendered an opinion which addresses these issues. … See Coakwell, supra; Irving Air Chute Co. v. United States, 117 Ct. Cl. 799 , 93 F.Supp 633 (1950).

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • Smith v. United States

    654 F.2d 50 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 17, 1981

    See also Clark v. United States, 596 F.2d 252 (7th Cir. 1979) (following Cook v. Arentzen, supra), and Clark v. United States, 226 Ct.Cl. 658 (1981). … See Commissioner v. Sunnen, 333 U.S. 591 -98 (1948); Torres v. United States, 225 Ct.Cl. 688 (1980).

    Cited 27 timesPublished
  • Morgan v. United States

    14 Ct. Cl. 442 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 15, 1878

    The steamer was to proceed down Mobile Bay, and, with the assistance of a Treasury aid and a squad of soldiers taken on board, was to secure and recover certain bales of cotton claimed to belong to the government from a stranded … In the case of Lane v. The United States ( 7 C. Cls.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Bates v. United States

    450 F.2d 886 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 12, 1971

    Zachry Co. v. United States, 170 Ct. … Nager Electric Co. v. United States, 194 Ct. Cl. 835 , 442 F. 2d 936 (1971). In the case of Carnegie Steel Co. v.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Russell v. United States

    5 Ct. Cl. 121 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 15, 1869

    There was a full complement of hands on board the boat at the time she was impressed into the service, and they were retained and paid by the claimant; and the other expenses of the boat were also •defrayed by him while she … (Bogart v. The United States, 2 C. Cls. R., 159 ; Mitchell v. Harmony, 13 How., 115 .)

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Parks v. United States

    230 Ct. Cl. 791 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 9, 1982

    The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) upheld the removal after a hearing, 1 and he then brought suit in the District Court for the District of Columbia which transferred the action to this court. … See, e.g., Ricci v. United States, 205 Ct. Cl. 687 , 507 F.2d 1390 (1974). Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is denied, and defendant’s cross-motion is granted. The petition is dismissed.

    Cited 0 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.