Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersuscfc

6,911 results

1.69s

  • Data Monitor Systems, Inc. v. United States

    74 Fed. Cl. 66 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 20, 2006

    LLC v. … Board’s actual decision.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Modeer v. United States

    68 Fed. Cl. 131 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 26, 2005

    Co. v. … Prior to the entry of a final *139 judgment by a court or a decision by an agency board of contract appeals, the court or agency board shall require a defective certification to be corrected.”); Medina, 43 Fed.Cl. at 548

    Cited 26 timesPublished
  • Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation v. United States

    122 Fed. Cl. 711 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 20, 2015

    Cl. 210; Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. v. United States, 112 Fed. Cl. 313 (2013) (“Sikorsky V”). … The contractor appealed the denial of nine of those claims to the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals. Id.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • The Dana R. Hodges Trust v. United States

    111 Fed. Cl. 452 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 21, 2013

    Hodges Trust v. United States, 101 Fed. Cl. 549, 550 (2011); see also Thompson v. United States, 101 Fed. … In Illig v. United States, 58 Fed.

    Cited 33 timesPublished
  • Seaboard Lumber Co. v. United States

    45 Fed. Cl. 404 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 22, 1999

    See 41 U.S.C. § 602 (a); Mendenhall v. Kusicko, 857 F.2d 1378, 1379 (9th Cir.1988) (per curiam); Spectrum v. United States, 764 F.2d 891 , 893 n. 3 (D.C.Cir.1985). … Other background can be found at Manke Lumber Co. v. United States, 45 Fed.Cl. 157 (1999); Seaboard Lumber (Penn Timber) v. United States, 44 Fed.Cl. 215 (1999); Manke Lumber (Mount Adams) v.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Holmes v. United States

    92 Fed. Cl. 311 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 15, 2010

    v. … Peanut Farmers v. United States, 409 F.3d 1370, 1374-75 (Fed.Cir.2005) ("[A]bsent transfer, applicable statutes of limitations may bar [plaintiffs] from adjudicating otherwise legitimate claims.”); see also Brown v.

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Simmons v. United States

    71 Fed. Cl. 188 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 25, 2006

    Brown Park Estates-Fairfield Dev. Co. v. United States, 127 F.3d 1449 , 1456 (Fed.Cir.1997). … The Brown Park Court continued that “a claim upon a single distinct event, which may have continued ill effects later on, is not a continuing claim.” Id.

    Cited 25 timesPublished
  • Butts v. United States

    United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 15, 2014

    Brown v. United States, 74 Fed. Cl. 546, 550 (20()6) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1631). The first condition of the transfer statute has been met, because this court lacks jurisdiction over plaintiffs employment-related claims. … Compare Ainsworth v. Loudon County School Ba’., 851 F. Supp. 2d 963, 978 & n.7 (E.D. Va. 2012) (considering an ADA claim brought by a former employee against the Loudon County (Virginia) School Board), with McCray v.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Aey, Inc. v. United States

    114 Fed. Cl. 619 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 30, 2014

    After the parties filed their cross-motions for summary judgment on Count I, the Federal Circuit rendered its decision in Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc., v. United States, 728 F.3d 1348 (Fed. … Kellogg Brown & Root Servs. v. United States, 99 Fed. Cl. 488, 493 (2011) (“KBR I”).

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Abbas v. United States

    124 Fed. Cl. 46 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 21, 2015

    The United States later dissolved the Board for the Validation of German Bonds in 1960. Def. Mot. at 4; Pl. Opp. at 3. … United States v.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Technatomy Corporation v. United States

    United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 13, 2019

    The Court found that the evaluation board’s failure to enter on a chart the dates that the legal team and the board finished editing Technatomy’s evaluation did not prove that the evaluation was not completed, but merely … Co. v. United States, No. 16-1481C, 2017 WL 1406862, *1 (Fed. Cl.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Neuren v. United States

    41 Fed. Cl. 422 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 22, 1998

    Plaintiff cites several cases, including Ferrell v. United States, 23 Cl.Ct. 562 (1991), and Sawyer v. … Sanford v. United States, 32 Fed.Cl. 363, 366 (1994).

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • SANCHEZ v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

    United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 24, 2024

    Sanchez v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. … Wittner v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. Servs., 43 Fed.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Loeh v. United States

    53 Fed. Cl. 2 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 28, 2002

    See Mullenberg v. … In Barker v.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Moore v. United States

    42 Fed. Cl. 595 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 23, 1998

    See Morin v. … The ICC was replaced by the Surface Transportation Board in 1995. To avoid confusion, this order will use the term ICC. .

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Pohanic v. United States

    48 Fed. Cl. 166 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 25, 2000

    See 28 U.S.C. § 1491 (a)(1); Palmer v. … See 37 U.S.C. § 204 (a)(1); see also Palmer, 168 F.3d at 1314 ; Holley v.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Siemens Government Technologies, Inc. v. United States

    United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 15, 2025

    But Siemens quickly moved unopposed on July 5, 2022, to stay the proceedings until a parallel appeal of an Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (the “Board”) decision was resolved by the United States Court of Appeals … Barnhart v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Bruzos v. United States

    United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 3, 2017

    Inc. v. … V.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Johnson Lasky Kindelin Architects, Inc v. United States

    United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 23, 2020

    Cir. 1987) (holding “that appellant’s claims sound in tort, of which the Board has no jurisdiction under the Contract Disputes Act”); see also Ayala v. United States, 16 Cl. … Corp. v.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Tolar v. United States

    United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 12, 2018

    Appeals to a correction board are irrelevant to the question of claim accrual. See Martinez, 333 F.3d at 1304-05. Although Mr. … Voge v. United States, 844 F.2d 776, 780 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

    Cited 0 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.