Case law

Maniere v. United States

31 Fed. Cl. 410 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 17, 1994

Privity of Contract as a Jurisdictional Basis No jurisdiction exists in this Court absent the waiver of sovereign immunity by the United States. United States v. … See id. at 430 (“For purposes of determining whether a party qualifies as a third-party beneficiary, a court should focus its inquiry upon only the first prong * * *.”).

Doninger Metal Products, Corp. v. United States

50 Fed. Cl. 110 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 31, 2001

The Plan clearly states that the Committee “may have the Debtor bring the claim against the USPS” if the Committee elects to do so. … Defendant, however, does assert that the plaintiff utterly fails to establish that the originals were made available to the United States during this de novo proceeding, nor is it able to affirmatively establish that the

American Heritage Bancorp v. United States

53 Fed. Cl. 723 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 11, 2002

The original Section (d)(11) clearly did not establish a “super-priority” for the claim of the FDIC based on payments to insured depositors. … 855 F.2d 1573, 1576-77 (Fed.Cir.1988) (“The 6-year statute of limitations on actions against the United States is a jurisdictional requirement attached by Congress as a condition of the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity

Strouse v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 19, 2026

The authors concluded: We have clearly demonstrated that the variability of humoral immune responses to the HepBsAg in vaccine recipients is reflected by a concurrent variability of in vivo cellular … Conclusion For the reasons discussed above, the undersigned finds that petitioner has established by preponderant evidence that the immune response to the second hepatitis B vaccine he received on August 9, 2018 was

Aubre v. United States

40 Fed. Cl. 371 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 20, 1998

A waiver of sovereign immunity is to be construed strictly. See Hart, 910 F.2d at 818-19 . Defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted. 2. … In order to prevail plaintiff must show by “cogent and clearly convincing evidence,” Wronke v. Marsh, 787 F.2d 1569, 1576 (Fed.Cir.1986) (quoting Dorl v.

Magma Power Co. v. United States

101 Fed. Cl. 562 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 28, 2011

However, she clearly suggested this to be the case: I think Congress was well aware of the problem of large corporations. That is in the legislative history. … If one were to consider the legislative backdrop to the contested provision, however, it would clearly support the plaintiffs’ interpretation of the statute.

Caddell Construction Company v. United States

125 Fed. Cl. 30 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 10, 2016

To establish standing, Caddell need only show that “it would have been a qualified bidder” in a competitive procurement, had the procurement error not occurred – it does not “need to show that it would have received the award … These are clearly “prejudice” type inquiries to be made in the context of fashioning relief.

Ginsburg v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 31, 2018

A court must grant summary judgment “against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at … Unless an exclusion applies, payments that are “undeniable accessions to wealth, clearly realized, and over which the taxpayers have complete dominion” constitute taxable income. Commissioner v.

Glendale Federal Bank, FSB v. United States

39 Fed. Cl. 422 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 10, 1997

Hearsay may not be used for cross-examination unless it qualifies under an exception to the hearsay rule or is permitted by FRE 703 because it was relied upon by a testifying expert. … FRE 703. *426 Applying these rules to the instant case, the deposition testimony of Professor Ruback may be used to cross-examine Professor Fischel only to the extent that Plaintiff can establish that the deposition testimony

Petty v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 23, 2020

“received his 2 month immunizations and developed diarrhea that lasted for 6 months.” Pet. Ex. 3 at 1; see Pet’r’s Mot. at 7, 12. … But by the time L.P. received his vaccinations, he already had a well-established medical history of gastrointestinal problems.

Ak-Chin Indian Community v. United States

85 Fed. Cl. 636 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 5, 2009

Defendant further explains that the record retention processes established by the provision of the MOU quoted in the court’s January 14, 2009 opinion, which applies to Tribal Records only, does not therefore govern the storage … “Manifest” is defined as “clearly apparent or obvious.” Ammex, Inc. v. United States, 52 Fed.Cl. 555, 557 (2002).

Brookins v. Untied States

75 Fed. Cl. 133 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 30, 2007

Individual claimants, therefore, must look beyond the jurisdictional statute for a waiver of sovereign immunity. United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. at 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 . … This determination by the court does not, of course, preclude plaintiff from pursuing, and qualifying for, a normal reserve retirement. c.

Cardiosom, L.L.C. v. United States

117 Fed. Cl. 526 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2014

Cir. 2011) (finding that the immunity provision in MIPPA did not manifest an unambiguous intent to withdraw the Tucker Act’s waiver of sovereign immunity), rev’g 91 Fed. Cl. 659 (2010); Cardiosom, L.L.C. v. … Plaintiff has established its breach of contract claim and thereby, has proven defendant’s contract liability. B.

Coast Professional, Inc. v. United States

120 Fed. Cl. 727 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 22, 2015

A CPCS score of 85 or more also qualified the contractor for an award term extension pursuant to Section H.4 of the TOs. … In the court’s view, application of this waiver doctrine, per the caveat established by the Federal Circuit in Blue & Gold Fleet, could easily be invoked here.

Golden It, LLC. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 25, 2023

The management plan had to “provide a clear chain of responsibility, quality control plan, cost control method, contract administration, and adequate, qualified staff resources.” Id. … The Tucker Act’s waiver of sovereign immunity “covers a broad range of potential disputes arising during the course of the procurement process[,]” including “objections to an award[.]” Sys. Application & Techs., Inc. v.

Innovation Development Enterprises of America, Inc. v. United States

108 Fed. Cl. 711 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 29, 2013

Standing Defendant relies on Myers, 275 F.3d at 1370-71, for the proposition that IDEA must establish that it would have been a qualified bidder for CMAS support services in a competitive procurement. … Here, however, IDEA’s status as a qualified bidder that had a substantial chance of contract award in a hypothetical competitive procurement may be established by material before the agency at the time of the sole-source

Doe/11 ex rel. Estate of Child/Doe/11 v. Secretary of the Dept. of Health & Human Services

87 Fed. Cl. 1 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 7, 2009

Levin, that a vaccination induces a cytokine response from the immune system to counter the antigens released by the vaccination, she noted that only in rare cases does a cytokine storm occur. Id. at 251-53. … Petitioners argue that the 25-ineh measurement is “clearly wrong” because it would have required Monica’s pediatrician “to be wrong by 3 and 1/4 inches,” and would have required her to grow at the rate of “3/4 of an inch

Foukarakis v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 16, 2025

Clearly defined sensory level 4. … Bromberg opined that Petitioner partially fulfilled the criterion of clearly defined sensory level. Resp. Ex. A at 11.

Lukos Vatc Jv LLC v. United States

116 Fed. Cl. 108 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 12, 2014

These arguments are joined by both the Government and ITA, but ITA adds a further assertion that LVJV has failed to establish this Court’s jurisdiction. … The broad “in connection with” language of the Tucker Act clearly encompasses the agency actions here, both in that SOCOM requested confirmation of small business status from the SBA specifically for purposes of awarding

Riley & Ephriam Construction Co. v. United States

61 Fed. Cl. 405 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 29, 2004

As a formal matter, the Plaintiff has the burden of establishing the Court’s jurisdiction. Cedars-Sinai Med. Ctr. v. Watkins, 11 F.3d 1573 , 1583 (Fed.Cir.1993). … While we suspect that not all fax machines include an electronic message, the particular fax machine used in this case clearly qualifies; the CO stated in his declaration that it had indicated a successful transmission.