Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
2.36s
42 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,352 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 28, 1998
In 1992 DOE established a Cost Reduction Proposal program (“CRP program”) with WSRC. … A third-party beneficiary need not be specifically or individually identified in the contract, but must fall within a class that the contract clearly intends to benefit. See Montana, 124 F.3d at 1273 .
Cited 5 timesPublished63 Fed. Cl. 424 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 30, 2004
Sacco was not a “prevailing party” under federal fee-shifting statutes as established by Buckhannon. … Here, the MSPB and the Federal Circuit clearly have jurisdiction over the “subject matter” of Plaintiffs’ underlying adverse personnel actions, a suspension and a removal.
Cited 16 timesPublishedDistrict of Columbia v. United States
67 Fed. Cl. 292 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 26, 2005
Indeed, it would be illogical for there to be language in the Act to limit reimbursement to only forty-eight hours’ worth of treatment when clearly there is no language which limits the treatment of qualifying patients under … “Waivers of immunity from interest must be clearly stated in the language of the statute.” Id. at 712.
Cited 23 timesPublishedSnyder ex rel. Snyder v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
88 Fed. Cl. 706 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 11, 2009
However, the special master clearly stated that because Dr. … A qualified expert with lesser qualifications may offer an opinion that, for a variety of reasons, is more persuasive than that of a more qualified expert testifying on behalf of an opposing party.
Cited 670 timesPublished57 Fed. Cl. 376 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2003
The regulations that set forth the standards for qualifying as an LEO are found at 5 C.F.R. §§ 831.903-831.911 (2000) and identify two methods for claiming LEO credit: (1) by agency determination that a position qualifies … the award of interest separate from a general waiver of immunity to suit, the United States is immune from an interest award.
Cited 16 timesPublishedR&R Conner Aviation, L.L.C. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 9, 2024
It also is necessary to establish a waiver of sovereign immunity, without which no claim against the United States may proceed, because “[t]he government consents to be sued only by those with whom it has privity of contract … Thus, the contract’s contemplation that NFF would employ subcontractors like R&R Conner is insufficient to establish that R&R Conner “fall[s] within a class clearly intended to be benefited” by the contract.
Cited 0 timesPublished27 Fed. Cl. 615 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 5, 1993
Specifically, the EEOC found that each plaintiff met the definition of a qualified handicapped person, 29 C.F.R. §§ 1613.702 (a)(2), 1613.702(a)(3) and 1613.702(f), capable of safely performing the duties of the positions … to suit, the United States is immune from an interest award.
Cited 8 timesPublishedDoyle ex rel. Doyle v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
92 Fed. Cl. 1 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 19, 2010
What was never established was the equating of chronic with insidious onset.... Dr. … Sandler is extraordinarily qualified to testify regarding ITP. But, proof of causation entails more than having a well-qualified expert proclaim that the vaccination caused a disease.
Cited 24 timesPublished77 Fed. Cl. 126 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 19, 2007
. § 1915(a)(1), and is found to qualify for informa pauperis status.”). … However, none of the sections cited by plaintiff establishes a substantive right of recovery.
Cited 12 timesPublishedFlores v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
115 Fed. Cl. 157 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 21, 2014
an exuberant, rapid immune response; and that the immune response resulted in petitioner’s blood clot, either through inflammation or platelet aggregation. … An abuse of discretion occurs when a “decision is based on clearly erroneous findings of fact, is based on erroneous interpretations of the law, or is clearly unreasonable, arbitrary or fanciful.” Cybor Corp. v.
Cited 85 timesPublishedC. K., as Mother and Next Friend of V.K. v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
113 Fed. Cl. 757 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 19, 2013
McCabe is qualified to testify about causation even though he would not be qualified to testify about treatment. Petitioner also opines that, while Dr. … McCabe was uniquely qualified to testify about the causal connection between Gardasil and SJIA based on his research as an immunologist, Dr.
Cited 40 timesPublishedGriffin v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 25, 2014
Considering the principles of sovereign immunity as well as the clearly stated legislative purpose that the Vaccine Act be a national program that prevents the spread of infectious disease from other countries within this … dictates, that Congress means to incorporate the established meaning of these terms. . . .
Cited 0 timesPublished93 Fed. Cl. 139 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 7, 2010
The United States Supreme Court has found that “a court may dismiss a claim as factually frivolous only if the facts alleged are ‘clearly baseless’ ... a category encompassing allegations that are ‘fanciful’ ... … Finally, plaintiffs are not seeking monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from the relief requested.
Cited 42 timesPublishedGamache v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
27 Fed. Cl. 639 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 26, 1993
The special master cites and applies that article in her July 16,1992, decision as follows: A local reaction to a DPT immunization, even including fussiness, fever, redness, swelling, and crying hardly qualifies as a seizure … It does not establish a seizure disorder. Gamache , slip op. at 16-17.
Cited 8 timesPublishedAdams v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
76 Fed. Cl. 23 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 22, 2007
The Vaccine Act provides that a petitioner may qualify to receive compensation and other relief under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (“Program”), if injury can be established either by causation in law or causation … The court has determined that both experts were extraordinarily well qualified. See Ex. 17; Ex. B.
Cited 15 timesPublishedHennessey v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
91 Fed. Cl. 126 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 7, 2010
She evaluated the expert witnesses and determined “that respondent’s witnesses were far more qualified to opine on T1D than Dr. Shoen-feld.” Id. at *44. The special master clearly did not ignore Dr. … AAA at 6, and that vaccines present a similar challenge to the immune system as the disease against which they immunize.
Cited 72 timesPublishedSpates v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
76 Fed. Cl. 678 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 24, 2007
Petitioner clearly believes that Dr. Sin-doni’s testimony was persuasive and should, therefore, be a sufficient demonstration of causation. … A chart in the MMWR reflected that 22 out of 683 women (immune or not) suffered a miscarriage after receiving the rubella vaccine. Of the 32 women who were immune to rubella (like Ms.
Cited 5 timesPublishedWhitney v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
122 Fed. Cl. 297 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 12, 2015
Rush was “an unbiased and qualified doctor” since he “discounted the vaccinations as a cause for myelitis without referring to the HHV-6 virus.” Id. at 17-18. … Tr. 494:15-24, 593:24 to 594:2 (Weintzen) (“[S.W.] was in the recovery stage of his HHV-6 [infection] clearly.”); see also Hr’g Tr. 31:12-14 (“[H]is immune system had kicked in and was starting to fight off the virus.”).29
Cited 6 timesPublishedTebcherani v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
55 Fed. Cl. 460 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 5, 2003
See Onset Decision at 1-2. 4 The Special Master also indicated that he “affirmed” his October 6, 1999 determination, 5 and concluded that petitioner was unable to establish injuries within the time frame that would qualify … Establishing Entitlement to Compensation Pursuant to the Vaccine Act The Vaccine Act provides two methods for establishing eligibility for compensation. See Munn, 970 F.2d at 865 .
Cited 6 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · May 16, 2013
Accordingly, in this case Petitioners have clearly failed to demonstrate Prong 1 of Althen. C. … Thus, Petitioners have also failed to establish Prong 2 of Althen in this case. D.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna