Case law

Bradley v. United States

42 Fed. Cl. 333 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 19, 1998

Library of Congress v. … v.

Longval v. United States

41 Fed. Cl. 291 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 6, 1998

Dehne holds specifically that the Court of Federal Claims has jurisdiction over appeals from Boards of Correction. Dehne, 970 F.2d at 892 ; Weide v. … There is no review in this court of “injustice” alleged to have been perpetrated by a Board of Correction under 10 U.S.C. § 1552 . Murphy v.

Vierrether v. United States

27 Fed. Cl. 357 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 23, 1992

Arens v. United States, 969 F.2d 1034, 1037 (Fed.Cir.1992); Jones v. United States, 7 Cl.Ct. 673, 679 (1985); Sanders v. United States, 219 Ct.Cl. 285, 301-02 , 594 F.2d 804 (1979). … Giglio v. United States, 17 Cl.Ct. 160, 166 (1989); Keef v. United States, 185 Ct.Cl. 454, 463 (1968).

Haggart v. United States

131 Fed. Cl. 628 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 4, 2017

v. … After examining all of the Brown factors, however, the court ultimately held that the factors taken together favored an easement. Id. 14 See Pls.’

Roseberry-Andrews v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 24, 2019

United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206, 216-17 (1983) (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 400 (1976)). See also Fisher v. United States, 402 F.3d 1167, 1172 (Fed. … Trusted Integration, Inc. v. United States, 659 F.3d 1159, 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (citing Henke v. United States, 60 F.3d 795, 797 (Fed. Cir. 1995)).

Morse Diesel International, Inc. v. United States

69 Fed. Cl. 558 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 1, 2006

See Alliant Techsystems, Inc. v. … See Morse Diesel, Inc. v. United States, No. 99-279C (Fed.Cl.

Willingham v. States

35 Fed. Cl. 633 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 6, 1996

Did you or did you not have contact with the Board? Did you dialogue with the Board? Did you respond to the Board? Did you keep them posted of your situation or not? You are [an] attorney. You have told me that. MR. … What contact did you have with the Board? MR.

First Federal Lincoln Bank v. United States

54 Fed. Cl. 446 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 19, 2002

(FHLBB or Bank Board).” … Sav. & Loan Assoc. v.

Jones v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 25, 2020

Sand & Gravel Co. v. … by the corrections board.

Sabo v. United States

127 Fed. Cl. 606 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 26, 2016

Chapter 61; v. … It is well settled that resort to a correction board is a permissive action, not a mandatory requirement. See Antonellis v. United States, 723 F.3d 1328, 1333 (Fed.

Pioneer Reserve, LLC v. United States

119 Fed. Cl. 201 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 21, 2014

Henke v. United States, 60 F.3d 795, 797 (Fed. … D & N Bank v. United States, 331 F.3d 1374, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (citing Lewis v. United States, 70 F.3d 597, 600 (Fed. Cir. 1995)).

Federal Management Systems, Inc. v. United States

61 Fed. Cl. 364 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 20, 2004

See generally Banknote Corp., Inc. v. … Steinthal & Co., Inc. v.

Jordan v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 15, 2022

See Porter v. United States, 163 F.3d 1304, 1311 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (“Section 1552 of title 10 gives the military secretaries power to correct military records using civilian boards.” (emphasis added)); Richey v. … Brown Park Ests.- Fairfield Dev. Co. v. United States, 127 F.3d 1449, 1456 (Fed. Cir. 1997); see also Ariadne Fin.

Williams v. United States

100 Fed. Cl. 263 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 16, 2011

The board found that Mr. … The board further advised Mr.

Fuller v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 20, 2020

After unsuccessfully petitioning the Board for the Correction of Naval Records, Fuller filed suit in this Court on April 24, 2015. See Fuller v. United States, 127 Fed. Cl. 640 (2016). … In reviewing the determinations of a military corrections board, a plaintiff must demonstrate “by cogent and clearly convincing evidence,” Wronke v. Marsh, 787 F.2d 1569, 1576 (Fed.

Polk v. United States

73 Fed. Cl. 331 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 11, 2006

Lee v. United States, 7 Cl.Ct. 654, 657 (1985) (citing DeBow v. United States, 193 Ct.Cl. 499, 503 , 434 F.2d 1333, 1335 (1970)). … Plaintiff relies on Dougherty v. United States Navy Board for Correction of Naval Records, 784 F.2d 499 (3d Cir.1986) to support his arguments that he is not barred by the statute of limitations.

King v. United States

81 Fed. Cl. 766 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 15, 2008

(Reynolds), 846 F.2d 746, 748 (Fed.Cir.1988) (citing Zunamon v. Brown, 418 F.2d 883, 886 (8th Cir.1969); McNutt v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178, 189 , 56 S.Ct. 780 , 80 L.Ed. 1135 (1936)); Garrett v. … Id.; see also Doe v.

Fp-Faa Seattle, LLC v. United States

124 Fed. Cl. 236 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 30, 2015

. § 3551; v. … Co. v. United States, 645 F.3d 1377, 1386 (Fed.

Stockton East Water District v. United States

70 Fed. Cl. 515 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 10, 2006

The relevant state water-control entity is the California State Water Resources Control Board (the “State Water Control Board” or the “Water Control Board”). … “[T]he Board, in effect, said to [Reclamation], ‘Show us your contracts and your ability to deliver the water and it may be available to you.’ ” United States v. Cal. State Water Res.

Terry v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 31, 2019

It is plaintiff’s burden to prove error on the part of the Army and the board by “clearly convincing evidence.” Wronke v. Marsh, 787 F.2d 1569, 1576 (Fed. Cir. 1986) (citing Dorl v. United States, 200 Ct. … The board is presuming something that was not there. Like the District Court in Hill v. Geren, 597 F. Supp. 2d 23, 30 (D.