Case law

Avocent Redmond Corp. v. United States

85 Fed. Cl. 640 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 5, 2009

Steel Corp. v. United States, 730 F.2d 1465 (Fed.Cir.1984) and expanded upon by the Ninth Circuit in Brown Bag Software v. Symantec Corp., 960 F.2d 1465 (9th Cir. 1992). In U.S. … See id.; Brown Bag, 960 F.2d at 1470-71 .

Sergent's Mechanical Systems, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2021

.”); The Davis Grp., Inc. v. United States, 2012 WL 2686053, *2–*3 (Fed. Cl. … Nash & John Cibinic, Postscript: Nonmonetary Claims, 19 No. 8 Nash & Cibinic Rep. ¶ 38 (2005) (explaining that “neither the court nor the boards have the power to grant injunctive relief” in CDA cases).

Bargsley v. United States

120 Fed. Cl. 619 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 17, 2015

. § 5101; v. … Final decisions on such appeals are made by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals. Id. § 7104; Disabled Am. Veterans v. Sec’y of Veterans Affairs, 419 F.3d 1317, 1319 (Fed.

National Food & Beverage Co. v. United States

103 Fed. Cl. 63 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 23, 2012

Water Dist. v. United States, 543 F.3d 1276, 1288 (Fed.Cir.2008) (“The jurisprudence pertaining to physical takings ‘involves the straightforward application of per se rules.’ ” (quoting Brown v. … Supervisors v. United States, 276 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed.Cir.2002) (quoting Olson v.

K & S Construction v. United States

40 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,914 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 3, 1996

Dayley v. United States, 169 Ct.Cl. 305, 308-309 , 1965 WL 8250 (1965). … The tolling principle does apply to decisions of the boards of contract appeal and to the 120-day period allowed by the Contract Disputes Act for the appeal of such decisions. Precision Piping, Inc. v.

Entines v. United States

39 Fed. Cl. 673 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 16, 1997

See Brown Park Estates-Fairfield Dev. Co., 127 F.3d at 1457; Friedman v. United States, 159 Ct. Cl. 1, 6-7 , 310 F.2d 381 (1963). … See Fallini, 56 F.3d at 1382-83 ; see also Brown Park Estates-Fairfield Dev.

Catholic University of America v. United States

49 Fed. Cl. 795 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 26, 2001

In Osborne v. … V.

Ambase Corp. v. United States

58 Fed. Cl. 32 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 25, 2003

TAKINGS CLAIM In Armstrong v. … Eastport Steamship Corp. v.

SANCHEZ v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 23, 2025

Moran v. … Roche v. Hyde, 51 Cal. App. 5th 757, 265 Cal.

Michael Stephen Shaw v. Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services 0

United States Court of Federal Claims · May 24, 2013

Morgan is board-certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology, as well as by the American Board of Independent Medical Examiners. Transcript of July 28, 2010 Hearing (Tr. 2) at 7; Pet.’s Ex. 68 at 2-3. Dr. … Id. 18 Board-certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology and describing himself as a bench-trained immunologist Awith strong interests in general immunology and

Florida Power & Light Co. v. United States

42 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,364 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 12, 1998

Brown v. United States, 3 Cl.Ct. 31, 41 (1983), aff'd, 741 F.2d 1374 (Fed.Cir.1984). … Brown, 3 Cl.Ct. at 41 ; see also Case, Inc. v. United States, 88 F.3d *484 1004, 1011 (Fed.Cir.1996).

Sumter v. United States

61 Fed. Cl. 517 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 20, 2004

See Brown v. U.S., 35 Fed.Cl. 258, 269 (1996) (explaining that Lonsdale v. … .”); see also Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d at 623 (“The Court of Federal Claims ... lacks jurisdiction over tort actions against the United States.”); LeBlanc v.

Information International Associates, Inc. v. United States

74 Fed. Cl. 192 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 31, 2006

.]”); Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621, 623 (Fed.Cir.1997) (holding that the United States Court of Federal Claim “lacks jurisdiction over tort actions against the United States”). … Corp. v.

L & D Services, Inc. v. United States

40 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,882 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 18, 1996

V. One additional point warrants mention. … See Wilner v. United States, 24 F.3d 1397, 1401 (Fed. Cir. 1994).

American Capital Corp. v. United States

66 Fed. Cl. 315 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 31, 2005

Co. v. … Co. v.

Sergent's Mechanical Systems, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2021

.”); The Davis Grp., Inc. v. United States, 2012 WL 2686053, *2–*3 (Fed. Cl. … Nash & John Cibinic, Postscript: Nonmonetary Claims, 19 No. 8 Nash & Cibinic Rep. ¶ 38 (2005) (explaining that “neither the court nor the boards have the power to grant injunctive relief” in CDA cases).

Squires v. United States

127 Fed. Cl. 352 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 30, 2016

See Moyer v. United States, 190 F.3d 1314, 1318 (Fed. … A claim for disability benefits accrues when a service member first seeks and is denied disability benefits from a competent board. Gov't Mot. at 7.

Raytheon Co. v. United States

104 Fed. Cl. 327 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 22, 2012

See Frazer v. … See, e.g., Brown Park Estates-Fairfield Dev. Co. v.

Orion International Technologies v. United States

66 Fed. Cl. 569 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 30, 2005

The plaintiff derives its version of the “bait and switch” theory from a number of GAO and Boards of Contract Appeal cases. 5 Although these are at most merely persuasive authorities, see, e.g., Fed. Mgmt. Sys., Inc. v. … Co. v. United States, 58 Fed.Cl. 230 , 255 n. 15 (2003); Transamerica Ins. Co. v. United States, 31 Fed.Cl. 602 , 605 n. 1 (1994); Universal Restoration, Inc. v.

Harbert/Lummus v. United States

41 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,020 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 30, 1996

Edwards v. United States, 22 Cl.Ct. 411, 423 (1991); see SCM Corp. v. … Miller Elevator Co., *516 Inc. v. United States, 30 Fed.Cl. 662, 693 (1994) (citing Branch Banking & Trust Co. v.