Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
1.70s
L-3 Communications Corp. v. United States
99 Fed. Cl. 283 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 20, 2011
In addition to alleging a violation of a statute or regulation, a plaintiff must qualify as an “interested party” under the Tucker Act. 28 U.S.C. § 1491 (b)(1). … The main contention between the parties is whether Egypt qualifies as a “foreign government reimbursing the agency.” 10 U.S.C. § 2304 (c)(4).
Cited 40 timesPublishedBales v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 14, 2020
Respondent denies that the aforementioned immunization caused petitioner’s injury. Stipulation at ¶ 6. Nevertheless, the parties have agreed to settle the case. … Bales Reversionary trust, to establish a grantor reversionary trust for the benefit of Jeffrey A.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedA. v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 10, 2023
Steinman is retained that are assigned to me, I will not compensate time spent on opinions on legal issues that he is not qualified to address.” (emphasis in original). … Steinman’s expert report went well beyond that standard and demonstrated how the homologies would produce an immune response.
Cited 0 timesPublished29 Fed. Cl. 136 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 18, 1993
Plaintiff’s substitute return clearly does not satisfy this test as it does not state the grounds for a refund, much less that a refund was even due. … Therefore, the substitute return does not qualify as a valid formal or informal claim for refund. II.
Cited 5 timesPublishedNavajo Nation v. United States
46 Fed. Cl. 217 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 4, 2000
Were this a court of equitable jurisdiction considering a private trust, plaintiffs might easily qualify for remedies typically afforded wronged beneficiaries. … By contrast, the “control” test has no such qualifiers. See Brown, 86 F.3d at 1560-61 .
Reversed on other grounds by Navajo Nation v. United States, 263 F.3d 1325 (2001)Cited 22 timesPublishedAlston-Bullock v. United States
122 Fed. Cl. 38 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 22, 2015
It is well established that “ ‘subject-matter jurisdiction, because it involves a court’s power to hear a ease, can never be forfeited or waived.’ ” (Arbaugh v. … Bullock’s income level might qualify him for in forma pauperis relief, as discussed above, his complaint is being dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiffs complaint is DISMISSED.
Cited 22 timesPublishedD.G. v. Secretary of Heath and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 18, 2019
Steinman “simply qualifies these symptoms as ‘relevant’ to his diagnosis of autoimmune dysautonomia (Ex. 93).” Id. at 31-32. Dr. … Steinman is unclear as to whether innate immunity or adaptive immunity causes AAG. Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedANAHEIM GARDENS v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 5, 2025
Riddiough clearly explained his methodology and the inputs he used to determine the economic losses for each of the FWPs’ properties. Dr. … As convincingly established at trial, she is a highly qualified expert in the field of appraisals. (See Trial Tr. vol. 10, Konikoff, 1956:4–1958:5, 1963:12–1964:20, 1977:20–1978:5, Jan. 23, 2023, ECF No. 672).
Cited 0 timesPublishedPalmyra Pacific Seafoods, L.L.C. v. United States
80 Fed. Cl. 228 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 22, 2008
Plaintiffs contend that the licenses are private, exclusive, transferrable contract rights that qualify as property interests protected by the Fifth Amendment. … Contrary to the implications of plaintiffs’ argument, exercise of governmental power pursuant to national security concerns or those of foreign policy does not immunize those governmental actions from judicial review.
Cited 2 timesPublished85 Fed. Cl. 726 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 12, 2009
Mere labels are insufficient to establish jurisdiction. Just as importantly, plaintiffs contractual theory is utterly fanciful. … To the contrary, this plaintiff has engaged in a campaign of harassment against various attorneys and judges and in so doing, has clearly abused the legal process. .
Cited 1 timesPublishedSkinner-Smith v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 3, 2019
A health care provider can choose not to qualify under the MMA, and if so, “the patient of a health care provider who has not qualified is no different from any other tort or contract victim, while the patient of a qualified … Cir. 2011) (“‘[W]here Congress has clearly stated its intent in the language of a statute, a court should not inquire further into the meaning of the statute.’” (quoting Millenium Lumber Distrib., Ltd. v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedIdaho Stage LLC v. United States
131 Fed. Cl. 727 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 2, 2017
In response to defendant’s motion in limine, plaintiff argues that there is no language in the contract “which in plain terms clearly and specifically states that the Superintendent shall not serve as SSHO for the Project … These references, however, do not establish that the project superintendent could not serve in a dual role as the SSHO.
Cited 0 timesPublishedBluebonnet Sayings Bank v. United States
47 Fed. Cl. 156 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 6, 2000
Credible testimony established that Lifeshares did not purchase subordinated debt in 1989 because it no longer qualified as regulatory capital and would not have satisfied the new capital requirement if plaintiffs used subordinated … “In the absence of express congressional consent to the award of interest separate from a general waiver of immunity to suit, the United States is immune from an interest award.” Library of Congress v.
Reversed on other grounds by Bluebonnet Savings Bank, F.S.B., Stone Capital, Inc. (Formerly Known as Cfsb Corporation), and James M. Fail v. United States, 266 F.3d 1348 (2001)Cited 27 timesPublishedDevaughn v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 10, 2025
CIDP The record clearly establishes that although Petitioner was initially diagnosed with GBS, that diagnosis was later – and properly – revised to CIDP when she experienced a relapse of neurologic symptoms after … He established, a wild infection will inherently provide greater immune system stimulation, and therefore more opportunity for harm). 18 Importantly, Petitioner has not alleged that the Td vaccine caused Petitioner only
Cited 0 timesUnpublished40 Fed. Cl. 828 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 6, 1998
As defendant correctly contends, this clearly constitutes a rational basis for disparate treatment. The federal district courts in Texas are bound by the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Alexander v. … Federal Claims is an Article I court of limited jurisdiction created by Congress as a forum where private parties could sue the government for non-tort money claims, where the claims would otherwise be barred by sovereign immunity
Cited 18 timesPublished72 Fed. Cl. 68 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 27, 2006
The BJA found that SJH had “a clearly superior right of control as his employer, ie., the company could remove Mr. … Contractor’s original rates were established under the 1995 bid.
Cited 6 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 29, 2021
I.R.C. § 7430(c)(4)(E)(i); see also id. § 7430(g) (defining “qualified offer” and “qualified offer period”). … Specifically, they contend that “they made a qualified offer during the qualified offer period” by accepting Mr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedD&J Enterprises, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · May 4, 2022
To qualify as an “interested party” a protester must be an actual or prospective bidder who has a direct economic interest in the procurement. Id. (citations omitted). … In doing so, the SSA clearly outlined DRC’s advantages over D&J for both the management/technical and past performance factors.
Cited 0 timesPublished92 Fed. Cl. 549 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 29, 2010
However, this language does raise the question of whether separate accounts within a qualified pension trust established for [Section] 401(h) health care benefits should be considered as providing an ancillary benefit that … A 401(h) account is a tax-exempt trust that is established as part of an ERISA qualified pension plan. See generally Terry A.M.
Cited 4 timesPublishedHealthestate, LLC v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 10, 2020
Like the RFC, they were established by the United States for purely governmental purposes. Shipping Act of 1916, 64 P.L. 260, 39 Stat. 728. … proxy for purposes of this action because the suit is clearly against the United States. 9 The Court also found § 1500 did not bar the suit because the counterclaim in U.S.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna