Case law

Ruddick Corp. v. United States

3 Cl. Ct. 61 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 22, 1983

After some considerable preliminary skirmishing in the litigation, defendant moved for summary judgment, relying on the reallocation authority of Sec. 482 to clearly reflect the respective incomes of related entities to override … This is because, in 1958, Dynamics possibly had a capital loss carryover against which to apply any gain on the sale, whereas Reeves clearly had no such carryover.

Rawlins v. United States

197 Ct. Cl. 972 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 24, 1972

What, if any, part Admiral Wooldridge played in preparation of the Brainard fitness report is not established by the record. … On one report, Captain Lalor stated that plain *1007 tiff was “Qualified for promotion to next higher grade,” and' on the other that he was “Qualified for promotion and so recommended.” 22.

Thompson v. United States

139 F. Supp. 935 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 3, 1956

Since in this sort of a case this is a jurisdictional question, we should have considered this at the outset, but since it raises controversial legal questions about which there is some uncertainty, and since we are clearly … The board stated its opinion that the plaintiff was perma- *656 xiently unfit for general service, but qualified for limited service in the Army.

Benevento v. United States

461 F.2d 1316 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 16, 1972

. *808 (e) The evidence does not establish an average length of voyage for any other sort of vessel. … by the record, nor does the record indicate whether an engineer generally qualified to serve, and serving, aboard the Delaware or Albatross IV would be qualified, insofar as license is concerned, to serve aboard such other

Irving Dulcy v. United States

284 F.2d 687 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 2, 1960

Clearly the Seventh Region was correct in ruling the offered evidence was immaterial and nothing further was presented. … The President’s Committee on Government Employment Policy was established under Executive Order No. 10590.

Central National Life Insurance Co. of Omaha v. United States

574 F.2d 1067 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 19, 1978

Subsequently, a separate category was established in the Annual Statement for credit life reserves. 37. … Plaintiff contends that these differences "clearly indicate” that inclusion of the word "life” in "noncancellable life, health, and accident policies” was not merely an accident.

Albano Cleaners, Inc. v. United States

455 F.2d 556 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 18, 1972

That your interpretation that our clause refers to or establishes a “minimum order” is incorrect. We do not limit or refuse service on account of the size of the order. … We can find no instructions specifically prohibiting qualifying terms or conditions.

Quinault Allottee Ass'n v. United States

485 F.2d 1391 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 17, 1973

The Ninth Circuit rejected that contention and ruled that the treaty did not immunize the timber proceeds from charges author-ised by the 1920 statute and regulations promulgated thereunder. … The trustee’s duty is to preserve the trust and income therefrom to further the goal of qualifying the Indian to take his place in modern society.

Holt v. United States

140 F. Supp. 268 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 3, 1956

The facts are clearly distinguishable from the Hamrielc and Ramsey cases. It will be noted that in both the Hamrielc and the Ramsey cases plaintiff suffered permanent total disability. … This statute, I believe, clearly suggests that thereupon and thereafter the *809 officer becomes eligible for retired pay.

Perry v. United States

76 F. Supp. 503 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 1, 1948

The second purpose is to clearly define and indicate to the public the scope of the patent monopoly reserved to the inventor for the life of the patent and to enable those skilled in the art to readily ascertain what they … may manufacture and use without trespassing on the monopoly so established.

Peters v. United States

624 F.2d 1020 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 18, 1980

The fact that the Allen-Bradley Foundation is covered by the provisions clearly does not prevent the abuses targeted by the Tax Reform Act of 1969. … Clearly that is the case here. This conclusion is supported by Example No. 2 to Treasury Regulation 53.4947 — 1(b)(ii).

Laughlin v. United States

52 Ct. Cl. 292 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 2, 1917

Booth, Judge, reviewing the facts found to be established, delivered the opinion of the court: This is a suit under section 2 of the act of March 26, 1908, 35 Stat. … D., 177) and the department does not feel warranted in disturbing such long-established rule of adjudication.”

Northern Paiute Nation v. United States

9 Cl. Ct. 639 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 26, 1986

United States, 231 Ct.Cl. 466, 469 , 687 F.2d 377, 380 (1982), the court held “[i]t is well established that the date of breach is the proper date for establishing [fair market value]. See also, Northern Helex Co. v. … than the waiver of sovereign immunity in the case at bar, which is also governed by the *644 Indian Claims Commission Act.

Lopinson v. United States

15 Cl. Ct. 712 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 9, 1988

This result is clearly unfortunate for the plaintiffs. … This rule, as explained by the Supreme Court in Federal Crop Ins., is in no way qualified by any directive that the parties be of roughly comparable sophistication.

Merck & Co. v. United States

24 Cl. Ct. 73 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 10, 1991

The procedure is drastic and should be used only when clearly appropriate. … MSDQ’s production through 1974 was done under a license that granted immunity from suit for claims of infringement of Merck’s patent rights.

Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. United States

499 F.2d 611 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 19, 1974

Tallman, 380 U.S. 1, 16-17 (1965) : * * * When the construction of an administrative regulation rather than a statute is in issue, deference is even more clearly in order. … some *535 thing from the enacting clause, or to qualify and restrain its generality and prevent misinterpretation. * * * [United States v.

Excavation Construction, Inc. v. United States

494 F.2d 1289 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 17, 1974

Knott’s qualifications as a responsible and qualified contractor had already been satisfactorily established as a result of the investigation that had been made on the first invitation. 38 Comp. … the bidder’s failure specifically to acknowledge addenda 1 and 2 that had been issued, was held to constitute an informality that could be waived where the bidder’s bid on an item that had been added by addendum No. 1, clearly

Francis M. Fix v. The United States

368 F.2d 609 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 10, 1966

The administrators of a statute such as this have some leeway, and their implementing regulations should not be overturned unless clearly wrong. … It follows, we think, that plaintiffs’ additional pay for overtime could not legally exceed the maximum established by Congress for this type of irregular unscheduled overtime.

Skrobot v. United States

534 F.2d 237 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 17, 1975

If the guidelines of 4r-3b are met, an employee establishes a legal right to a promotion. … Thousands of government employees perform functions not formally established by their job descriptions.

Rhen v. United States

35 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,672 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 2, 1989

He contended the contract work had not been completed on time because he had trouble locating qualified employees and also had problems with his subcontractors. … The contract project maps clearly delineated the project work areas and this delineation clearly excluded the roadways.