Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
1.36s
84 Fed. Cl. 678 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 3, 2008
Waivers of sovereign immunity cannot be implied but “must be unequivocally expressed,” Lane v. … (HVH), which established HVH as the prime contractor to HUD for managing, marketing, and overseeing the sale of HUD-owned single family homes in Pennsylvania.
Cited 12 timesPublished38 Fed. Cl. 356 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 15, 1997
“It is well established that the Commissioner enjoys ‘broad discretion’ to determine whether, ‘in his opinion’ a taxpayer’s accounting methods clearly reflect income, Thor, 439 U.S. at 540 , 99 S.Ct. at 785 (quoting 26 C.F.R … A 100% mismatching between income and interest payments, as conceded by plaintiff, does not clearly reflect income. Plaintiff asked the court to consider the reasoning established in Priv. Ltr.
Cited 1 timesPublishedDavis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 18, 2015
There are two separate means of establishing entitlement to compensation. … the Table, then the injury may be presumed to qualify for compensation. §300aa- 13(a)(1); §300aa-11(c)(1)(C)(i); §300aa-14(a).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedWisconsin Electric Power Co. v. United States
90 Fed. Cl. 714 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 18, 2009
Circuit “operated in excess of its jurisdiction and, specifically, without an appropriate waiver of sovereign immunity.” … Hamal qualified as an expert witness more than 20 times. Mr. Hamal was qualified as an expert related to business decision-maldng, economic analysis, and the analysis of damages claims in the electric industry. .
Cited 24 timesPublishedMuscogee (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma v. United States
103 Fed. Cl. 210 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 2, 2011
Jurisdiction Litigation against the United States requires an explicit waiver of sovereign immunity. “The United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit save as it consents to be sued.” United States v. … The Arthur Anderson report clearly and admittedly does not meet these requirements.”
Cited 5 timesPublished93 Fed. Cl. 184 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 11, 2010
This requirement is clearly part of the language of the presumption stated in Charlson. … It can only be destroyed or overcome by convincing and uneontradicted evidence to the contrary which clearly and distinctly establishes a fact so that reasonable minds can draw but one inference.” Id. at 444.
Cited 3 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 20, 2022
If they have a national certification that could qualify for like two steps. … And then the steps are generally based on qualifying experience or – generally we would go qualifying experience initially. . . .
Cited 0 timesPublishedR. v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 16, 2022
furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly … It was felt that it was related to an influenza immunization that he had been given and he has now gotten lifelong exemption for receiving further influenza immunizations.8 Id.
Cited 0 timesPublishedLion Raisins, Inc. v. United States
57 Fed. Cl. 505 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 20, 2003
“As a waiver of sovereign immunity, the EAJA is interpreted narrowly. But this is not a talisman for permitting the government to avoid liability in all cases.” Massie v. … To qualify as a prevailing party, plaintiff must satisfy the eligibility requirements of both net worth and number of employees.
Cited 37 timesPublishedAnderson v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 15, 2017
Huq claimed that the MMR vaccine was itself immune-suppressive. The result, according to Dr. … Both experts were qualified to offer the opinions they did, but Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedBlue Lake Forest Products, Inc. v. United States
75 Fed. Cl. 779 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 29, 2007
The Court explained: It is well established that the attorney-client privilege is not limited to actions taken and advice obtained in the shadow of litigation. … On September 15, 2004, Plaintiffs argued that the Brouha Memorandum established a subject-matter waiver in their Revised Motion to Compel. Ex. C at 7.
Cited 22 timesPublished108 Fed. Cl. 106 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 21, 2012
Otherwise, the PEB would have found him to be "Physically Qualified.” … By contrast, the Navy’s conclusion that the illness was not duty-related is clearly indicated by the decision, in March 2006, to terminate Colonel Hoffman’s MEB processing. AR 180-81.
Cited 3 timesPublishedKane County, Utah v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 20, 2018
The PILT Act As described in greater detail in Kane County I, the PILT Act is a federal statute that is designed to “compensate[] local governments for the loss of tax revenues resulting from the tax- immune status … The Tucker Act serves as a waiver of sovereign immunity and a jurisdictional grant, but it does not create a substantive cause of action. Jan’s Helicopter Serv., Inc. v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 525 F.3d 1299, 1306 (Fed.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 5, 2024
. § 7422(a)” and that “Section 7422(a) waives the United States’ sovereign immunity from refund suits, . . . provided the taxpayer has previously filed a qualifying administrative refund claim” (internal citation omitted) … The Technical Explanation clearly supports Mr.
Cited 0 timesPublished53 Fed. Cl. 731 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 20, 2002
Moreover, he did not qualify for any of the statutory exceptions which would entitle him to credit for constructive service under section 206. … As a predicate for correction of his records, plaintiff first must establish a successful monetary claim against the United States. See Bobula v.
Vacated by Boone v. United States, 78 F. App'x 108 (2003)Cited 2 timesPublishedAmerican Capital Corp. v. United States
58 Fed. Cl. 398 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 31, 2003
Initially, FIRREA allowed thrifts to count “qualifying supervisory goodwill” toward half of the core capital requirements, but this transitional accommodation was phased out by 1995. … be definite before a contract may be established.
Cited 7 timesPublished54 Fed. Cl. 274 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 29, 2002
Legitimate claims against the Government are paid upon the establishment of sufficient proof. … The government also refers to the well-established principle that “[i]n construing a statute waiving the sovereign immunity of the United States, great care must be taken not to expand liability beyond that which was explicitly
Cited 2 timesPublishedSvagdis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 11, 2022
In attempting to establish entitlement to a Vaccine Program award of compensation for a off-Table claim, a petitioner must satisfy all three of the elements established by the Federal Circuit in Althen v. … Cir. 2007) (noting that “the government bears the burden of establishing alterative causation. . . . once petitioner has established a prima facie case”).
Cited 0 timesPublished116 Fed. Cl. 33 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 25, 2014
The petition for rulemaking requested that the Copyright Office "clearly establish that consumers have ownership rights in first-sales of online digital media," and, "if it is determined that ownership rights for cloud media … Section 1498(b) "codifies a limited waiver of sovereign immunity for copyright infringement claims against the government and establishes this court as the exclusive forum to hear such claims." Blueport Co.. LLP. v.
Cited 4 timesPublishedOverview Books, LLC v. United States
72 Fed. Cl. 37 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 24, 2006
an established publishing house. … Only after such a property interest has been established does it become subject to Constitutional protections.
Cited 8 timesPublished
Ask Donna