Case law

First Commerce Corp. v. United States

63 Fed. Cl. 627 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 18, 2005

Background 1 Plaintiff First Commerce Corporation (FCC or First Commerce) contracted with *629 the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB) in 1987 to acquire a failing thrift. See First Commerce Corp. v. … The two most relevant cases the court discussed were Sterling Savings v. United States, 53 Fed.Cl. 599 (2002), and Castle v.

Cooper v. United States

37 Fed. Cl. 28 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 22, 1996

Approximately seven miles below Lock E, Mackeys Creek converges with the confluence of the Little Brown and Big Brown Creeks to form the East Fork of the Tombigbee River (the “East Fork”). … Howard Indus., Inc. v. United States, 126 Ct.Cl. 283, 289-90 , 115 F.Supp. 481, 484-85 (1953); Cities Serv. Pipe Line Co. v.

ARNHOLD v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 15, 2025

Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621, 623 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a); Keene Corp. v. United States, 508 U.S. 200, 214 (1993)). … Brown v. United States, 73 F.3d 1100, 1102 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (citing Causby, 328 U.S. at 266).

Toohey v. United States

105 Fed. Cl. 97 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 17, 2012

v. … Peanut Farmers v.

Snyder v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

102 Fed. Cl. 305 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 28, 2011

He is board certified by the American Board of Pediatrics in Pediatrics and board certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology both in Neurology, with a Special Competence in Child Neurology, and in Neurodevelopment … Raymond is board certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology in Neurology, with a Special Qualification in Child Neurology, and board certified by the American Board of Medical Genetics in Clinical Genetics

Salem Financial, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 20, 2013

Sidley Austin Brown & Wood Sidley & Austin LLP was an international law firm that merged with Brown & Wood in 2001 to become Sidley Austin Brown & Wood LLP. Chapman Tr. 2976, 3177. … Reed gave a presentation to BB&T Corporation’s Board of Directors, in which he informed the Board of the potential STARS transaction. JX 245; PX 29. Mr.

Conscoop-Consorzia Fra Cooperative Di Prod. E Lavoro v. United States

62 Fed. Cl. 219 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 13, 2004

Heating & Plumbing Co. v. Kelso, 987 F.2d 1575, 1578 (Fed.Cir.1993); Interwest Constr. v. Brown, 29 F.3d 611, 615 (Fed.Cir.1994). The key words in the solicitation read: “A. … Brown Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 132 F.3d 724, 735 (Fed.Cir.1997) (“In order for Brown to prevail on its claim it must have relied on its interpretation when bidding the contract.”), reh’g denied (1998).

Atlas Enterprises Ltd. Partnership v. United States

32 Fed. Cl. 704 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 14, 1995

Mingus Constructors, Inc. v. United States, 812 F.2d 1387, 1390 (Fed.Cir.1987). … Brodie, and *709 PADC’s Board of Directors were uninformed as to the required treatment for Square 406. The record shows that Mr.

Whispell Foreign Cars, Inc. v. United States

97 Fed. Cl. 324 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 7, 2011

Reynolds v. Army & Air Force Exch. Serv., 846 F.2d 746, 748 (Fed.Cir.1988) (citing Zunamon v. Brown, 418 F.2d 883, 886 (8th Cir.1969)). … (quoting Brown v. Young, 69 Iowa 625 , 29 N.W. 941, 941 (Iowa 1886)). Iowa law does not govern this case. Plaintiffs also point to dicta in two cases, Davis v.

Speed v. United States

97 Fed. Cl. 58 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 28, 2011

Speed appealed her removal to the Merit Systems Protection Board (“Board”), which ultimately dismissed her case for lack of jurisdiction and untimeliness. Id. Contemporaneously, Ms. … Def.’s App. 26 (Speed v. United States Postal Serv., DA 0353-06-0594-1-1 (M.S.P.B. Nov. 29, 2006)) (citing 5 C.F.R. § 353.301 (b)). The Board found that the USPS had given Ms.

Coastal International Security, Inc. v. United States

93 Fed. Cl. 502 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 14, 2010

Inc. v. … Bank, FSB v.

Spalding & Son, Inc. v. United States

38 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,514 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 10, 1993

Amusement Co. v. United States, 148 Ct.Cl. 337, 342 , 180 F.Supp. 386, 390 (1960); Burkhardt v. United States, 113 Ct.Cl. 658, 667 , 84 F.Supp. 553, 559 (1949). That view no longer finds favor. … The rule now uniformly applied is stated in California Canners & Growers Ass’n v.

H.N. Wood Products, Inc. v. United States

59 Fed. Cl. 479 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 19, 2003

See, e.g., Lockheed Martin Corp. v. United States, 49 Fed. … Scott, 333 F.3d at 1368 (quoting Scott Timber Co. v.

Khalil v. United States

133 Fed. Cl. 390 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 2, 2017

Johnson v. United States, 135 F.3d 778 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (citing Blassingame v. United States, 33 Fed. … Brown v. United States, 74 Fed. Cl. 546, 550 (2006) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1631)."

Robert W. and Margaret E. Alexander Revocable Trust v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 18, 2022

Board). 3 49 U.S.C. § 10501(b). … The filed notice of consummation divests the Board of jurisdiction over the abandoned railroad line, and “state law reversionary property interests, if any, take effect.” Caldwell v.

BlueStar Energy Services, Inc. v. United States

100 Fed. Cl. 607 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 22, 2011

In RhinoCorps Ltd. v. … Plaintiffs bylaws provide that it is managed and governed by a Board of Directors (the “Board”) that can act when a quorum—a majority of directors—is present.

MAPCO Alaska Petroleum, Inc. v. United States

38 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,451 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 22, 1992

See, e.g., Glopak Corp. v. … The courts and boards that have addressed this question have universally found that the purpose of an EPA clause is to divide the risk of economic uncertainty between the parties. Beta Sys. v.

Colonial Press International, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 3, 2013

$2,599,581.80 $2,599,581.80 Dba Von Hoffman Brown Printing Company $4,282,202.92 $4,068,092.77 The D.B. … The Board's decision is not arbitrary, capricious, is supported by substantial evidence, and is correct as a matter of law. Consequently, this Court determines that the Board's decision should be affirmed.”

Rudolph and Sletten, Inc. v. United States

120 Fed. Cl. 137 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 23, 2015

Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006); M. Maropakis Carpentry, Inc. v. United States, 609 F.3d 1323, 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (citing Reynolds v. Army & Air Force Exch. Serv., 846 F.2d 746, 748 (Fed. … Tuba City Reg’l Health Care Corp. v.

Stewart v. United States

130 Fed. Cl. 172 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 5, 2017

Cir. 1998); Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621, 623 (Fed. Cir.) … (“Because Brown and Darnells complaints for ‘fraudulent assessment^]’ are grounded upon fraud, which is a tort, the court lacks jurisdiction over those claims.”), reh’g denied (Fed. Cir. 1997); Golden Pac. Bancorp v.