Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
1.14s
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 8, 2018
Winters asserts that the Order of the District Court vacating his unjust conviction qualifies as the certificate of innocence. … The certificate must clearly state or show that the recipient's conviction was set aside because he was innocent of the crime for which he was convicted, that he did not commit any of the acts charged or his acts constituted
Cited 0 timesPublished105 Fed. Cl. 81 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 14, 2012
The Tucker Act provides the waiver of sovereign immunity necessary for a plaintiff to sue the United States for money damages. United States v. Mitchell, 463 U.S. 206, 212 , 103 S.Ct. 2961 , 77 L.Ed.2d 580 (1983). … “The court will transfer a ease when a plaintiff articulates a clearly stated and non-frivolous complaint.” Schrader v. United States, 103 Fed.Cl. 92, 101 (2012) (citing Phang v.
Cited 1 timesPublished86 Fed. Cl. 82 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 24, 2009
United States, again asserting plaintiffs had not established subject matter jurisdiction. Sr. … There are two steps to evaluate adequacy of representation; first, the court must consider whether the proposed class counsel is “qualified, experienced and generally able to conduct the litigation.”
Reversed on other grounds by Bright v. United States, 603 F.3d 1273 (2010)Cited 19 timesPublished33 Fed. Cl. 810 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 11, 1995
The section of the Charge establishing the criteria that the board was to apply in dealing with women and minorities and to which plaintiffs object states: Your evaluation of minority and women officers must clearly afford … Once all of the records were scored and differences were resolved, an order of merit was established.
Cited 3 timesPublishedAziz El ex rel. Kamal-Jalal v. United States
124 Fed. Cl. 487 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 2, 2015
It is well established that “‘subject-matter jurisdiction, because it involves a court’s power to hear a case, can never be forfeited or waived.’ ” Arbaugh v. … El’s income level may qualify him for in forma pauperis status, as discussed above, his complaint is being dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Cited 0 timesPublished46 Fed. Cl. 834 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 19, 2000
The six-year time bar on actions against the United States is “a jurisdictional requirement attached by Congress as a condition on the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity.” Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. … Clearly, all events which gave plaintiff a cause of action for educational benefits due but not paid had transpired by August 17, 1974. Id.
Cited 3 timesPublishedK.L v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · May 3, 2017
In attempting to establish entitlement to a Vaccine Program award of compensation for a Non-Table claim, a petitioner must satisfy all three of the elements established by the Federal Circuit in Althen v. … Engstrand was sufficiently qualified to testify about the general nature of K.L.’s condition, but she has no demonstrated competence or skill as an immunologist.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 25, 2024
The Tucker Act waives sovereign immunity for lawsuits seeking tax refunds, but only when the plaintiff satisfies the tax code’s prerequisites. United States v. … Cl. 287, 290-91 (2005) (finding that a pro se taxpayer’s letters to the IRS qualified as an informal refund request because the written correspondence specified the tax years at issue, re- quested a refund, and notified
Cited 0 timesPublishedPusateri v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 21, 2024
Marks, “clearly stated that the petitioner had ulcerative colitis that explained her low immune globulin levels after the onset of [petitioner’s] ulcerative colitis.” Pet. Ex. 20 at 3. Dr. … Mark’s opinion clearly stated that the petitioner had ulcerative colitis that this explained her low immune globulin levels after the onset of her ulcerative colitis and diarrhea, but not before,” and, “[Dr.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished46 Fed. Cl. 406 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 27, 2000
Moreover, a waiver of the traditional sovereign immunity “cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed.” United States v. … Thus, plaintiff alleges that the Army has violated a number of its own regulations, a clearly justiciable issue.
Cited 5 timesPublished52 Fed. Cl. 208 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 1, 2002
Accordingly, in this case, the payments made to a laid-off employee qualify as supplemental unemployment compensation benefits. B. … In these situations, then, the separation payments do not qualify as supplemental unemployment compensation benefits.
Cited 11 timesPublishedUnited Enterprise & Associates v. United States
70 Fed. Cl. 1 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 21, 2006
Tech, he clearly cannot and he has no other company in mind to assist him other than G.S. Tech. AR at 464. E. … Instead, defendant merely argues that it “clearly would be prejudiced if UEA is granted relief in this ease.”
Cited 35 timesPublished99 Fed. Cl. 223 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 21, 2011
Under the federal court leave statute, qualifying employees who are “summoned ... by a court ... to serve” as jurors are entitled to paid leave for the duration of their service. 5 U.S.C. § 6322 (a) (2006). … That Act waives the sovereign immunity of the federal government for certain claims, including those founded upon Acts of Congress. 28 U.S.C. § 1491 (a)(1) (2006); see also Sanders v.
Cited 2 timesPublishedDodson v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
28 Fed. Cl. 550 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 10, 1993
That I do not believe a medical expert is needed at this stage in the process because the petition clearly establishes a table injury. 5. … That Congress may declare as jurisdictional statutory time periods in which to appeal is a proposition clearly established in the case law. Id. at 1176.
Cited 1 timesPublished94 Fed. Cl. 753 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 23, 2010
Once jurisdiction has been established, “[a] claimant alleging a Fifth Amendment takings claim ... … Arbelaez has failed to establish that she was an intended, direct beneficiary.
Cited 39 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 28, 2017
The United States Supreme Court has found that "a court may dismiss a claim as factually frivolous only if the facts alleged are 'clearly baseless' ... a category encompassing allegations that are 'fanciful' ... … immunity as to the types of claims allowed.
Cited 0 timesPublishedIBM Corporation v. United States
119 Fed. Cl. 145 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 25, 2014
Tech., 316 F.3d at 1319), the jurisdictional requirement that IBM establish its standing has been met. II. … For example, under the caption “Transition Team Qualifications,” EY stated that “[o]ur TP offers the availability of trained and qualified personnel,” explaining that EY had a “roster of current qualified personnel” who could
Cited 14 timesPublishedThe Centech Group, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 8, 2022
As an express waiver of the government’s immunity, the CDA “must be strictly construed in favor of the sovereign.” Orff v. United States, 545 U.S. 596, 601-02 (2005). … CENTECH’s current claim for storage, transportation, and insurance costs does not qualify as an enlarged claim.
Cited 0 timesPublishedBishop Hill Energy LLC v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 20, 2019
In February 2012, Bishop Hill placed a qualified wind facility into service at a cost of $433,077,031 and applied for a Section 1603 cash grant totaling $129,923,109. … The Tucker Act establishes our jurisdiction and waives sovereign immunity over certain claims against the United States, including those founded upon the Constitution and federal statutes and regulations. Id.
Cited 0 timesPublishedPrecision Pine & Timber, Inc. v. United States
63 Fed. Cl. 122 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 23, 2004
Purchaser agrees to provide receipts or other documentation to the Contracting Officer which clearly identify and verify actual expenditures. P.App. 23. … of the clause. *140 “[U]nder the doctrine of sovereign immunity, the United States cannot be held liable for costs without its consent.”
Cited 6 timesPublished
Ask Donna