Case law

Vogt v. United States

537 F.2d 405 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 16, 1976

In the light of the ambiguity of section 911, that interpretation was clearly reasonable. … However, this limited regulation cannot be deemed clearly pertinent to this case.

Braeburn Alloy Steel Corp. v. United States

95 Ct. Cl. 343 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 5, 1942

for a taking but for consequential damages and it is well established that the Government is *354 not liable for damages of that character. … Paul & Pacific Railroad Co., supra, the application of the doctrine outlined in those cases (Lynah and Cress) was limited and qualified.

Brown v. United States

122 Ct. Cl. 361 · United States Court of Claims · May 6, 1952

The United States as the sovereign is immune from liability in the absence of congressional action, and neither the President nor any of his executive officers, nor the courts, possess power to impose such liability. … In the instant case the plaintiff was clearly afforded all the procedural rights provided for one engaged in a loyalty test.

Augusta Towing Co. v. United States

5 Cl. Ct. 160 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 19, 1984

Contrary to this admonition, the class of taxed waterways established by the Act was arbitrarily selected, according to plaintiffs. … In rejecting a constitutional challenge to a federal aircraft registration tax based on the states’ constitutionally implied immunity to federal taxation, the Court in Massachusetts relied on “[a] clearly analogous line of

Little River Lumber Co. v. United States

36 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,945 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 28, 1990

Clearly, Lenihan would not qualify to certify a claim under this regulation. But, as defendant acknowledges, the FAR does not apply to the contracts involved herein. … Clearly, the FAR, in defining the term “claim,” requires the contractor to specify a sum certain. 8 But, as noted above, the FAR does not apply herein.

Duffy v. United States

690 F.2d 889 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 22, 1982

such method as, in the opinion of the Secretary, does clearly reflect income.” … deductions come clearly within the scope of the statute, they are not to be allowed.

Sarles v. United States

141 Ct. Cl. 709 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 5, 1958

The Army has refused to pay plaintiff the retirement pay for which he has admittedly qualified by age and length of service under the terms of the 1948 Act, on the ground that such payment is prohibited under the dual compensation … We are of *714 the opinion that the benefits of the 1948 Act were clearly-enacted for both members and former members of Reserve .components of the Armed Forces and of the National Guard, and membership or the holding of

Brookfield Construction Co. v. United States

661 F.2d 159 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 23, 1981

Congress clearly thought that contractors should be allowed interest prospectively, but there is no expression in the history bearing, one way or the other, on the retroactive imposition of interest for periods prior to the … This "entrenched immunity” is a part of sovereign immunity. United States v. New York Rayon Importing Co., 329 U.S. 654, 658-59 (1947).

Stewart v. United States

1 Ct. Cl. 113 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 15, 1864

Being apprehensive that the enemy would not respect the immunity afforded by a neutral port, Captain Stewart put to sea with the Constitution and his prizes, and the squadron immediately gave chase. … It is not held by the sovereign himself as private property; and no alienation shall be presumed except that which is clearly and indisputably expressed.”

Beaconwear Clothing Co. v. United States

355 F.2d 583 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 21, 1966

Contrary to the allegations contained in Spiotta’s third-party petition and plaintiff’s third amended petition, the record clearly establishes that Spiotta was not a bank or authorized financial institution within the meaning … At page 3 of the same document, the statement was made that “Plaintiff-assignee’s right to judgment is clearly established,” “the Use-plaintiff’s right to recovery is established by the pleadings,” and at page 4 thereof,

Phillips Construction Company, Inc. v. The United States

374 F.2d 538 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 17, 1967

price contract with defendant, erected at Myrtle Beach, South Carolina about 800 housing units under the authority of the Capehart Housing Act. 1 Because of adverse weather, the completion date for construction, originally established … I Financing the construction of housing for. military personnel under the Cape-hart Act 2 operated as follows: The lowest qualified bidder formed a corporation to which the Government leased certain lands where specified

Whitlock Corporation v. United States

159 F. Supp. 602 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 5, 1958

Plaintiff had specified clearly in its bid that the entire contract was to be performed by Hatheway under subcontract. … Although the record does not establish that such a preaward survey was made, the contract was awarded to plaintiff on March 7, 1952, and plaintiff immediately ordered Hatheway to proceed with the subcontract.

Shull v. United States

228 Ct. Cl. 750 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 10, 1981

In the main, plaintiff argues that the 1975 decision was error because no inspection was conducted and that these materials qualified under a "local policy” that had been applied to other servicemen. … As there was no inventory to establish the contents or condi *754 tion of the shipment, plaintiffs brother took no exception to the delivery and received the goods in "as is” condition.

Mississippi River Fuel Corporation v. The United States

314 F.2d 953 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 5, 1963

Commissioner, 7 Cir., 267 F.2d 853 -(1959), is clearly distinguishable on the-facts from the case at bar. … If this case does not fall within the provisions of subparagraph (D) it is difficult to visualize a case that would qualify.

Monteverdi v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services

19 Cl. Ct. 409 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 26, 1990

However, we emphasize that henceforth counsel shall clearly understand that proof of hours expended for legal services must be established by contemporaneous time records. … Such an enigmatic result clearly was not contemplated by the statute. See also, 135 Cong.Rec.

Coflexip & Services, Inc. v. United States

37 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,089 · United States Court of Claims · May 2, 1991

Absent the specific waiver of sovereign immunity contained in CICA, this court found that it had no jurisdiction to award recovery of a money judgment for contract protest costs against the United States. … This document clearly states that demonstration of the entire system was a condition imposed only upon Watters and did not apply to component suppliers.

Richard G. Augenblick v. The United States

377 F.2d 586 · United States Court of Claims · May 12, 1967

Documents “clearly beyond the reach of the statute” perhaps need not be produced. … But in the absence of the notes it could not be said, without much doubt and hesitation, that they failed to qualify as a “statement.”

Walker v. United States

11 Cl. Ct. 77 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 16, 1986

The general rule is that this waiver of sovereign immunity merely defines the parameters of the Claims Court’s jurisdiction; “it does not create any substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages … The Federal Circuit in Rosano and Connolly has clarified and limited the ramifications of Kennedy, Jackson, and Swaaley, and their reasoning clearly has no useful application to the instant case.

Dianish v. United States

183 Ct. Cl. 702 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 19, 1968

These conclusions were clearly within the area of competence of the acting officials and classifiers of the Bureau, and the appointment of plaintiffs as GS-12s after the reorganization was clearly within the discretion of … interviewers who consulted the plaintiffs were as well-qualified as might be expected for personnel experts lacking technical background in jet and turbojet engines.

Circle K Corp. v. United States

23 Cl. Ct. 659 · United States Court of Claims · Aug 2, 1991

Plaintiff’s proxy statements, news releases, and representations to shareholders regarding its “intent” clearly played no part in the court’s decision. … The court determined that stock purchased with an option to buy crude oil qualified, as a matter of law in these particular circumstances, as a legitimate hedging transaction.