Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
0.93s
Freeman v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human Services
35 Fed. Cl. 280 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 27, 1996
In addition, it is well established that the catchall exception of subsection (6) is not available unless the asserted grounds for relief are not recognized in clauses (1) through (5). Laney v. … As this court has made clear in the past, however, mere negligence or misrepresentation by a party’s attorney does not qualify as excusable neglect under Rule 60(b)(1). Primbs v.
Cited 30 timesPublishedP. v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 31, 2022
Adams, “clearly show that her complaints were secondary to the injection.” Id. 8 Dr. … Petitioner bears the burden of establishing actual causation.
Cited 0 timesPublishedMunn v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 3, 2025
Ojcius, Alarmins, Inflammasomes and Immunity, 35 BIOMED. … Gensler, who is better qualified than Dr. Ryal on this subject, is persuasive in suggesting that Dr. Ryal has overstated the evidence supporting her view.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedYRT Services Corp. v. United States
38 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,512 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 6, 1993
The strengths and weaknesses of each offeror should be summarized and the qualified offers identified along with the recommended offer. … Clearly, NPS treated the limit on liability as a responsiveness issue.
Cited 19 timesPublishedB.H. Aircraft Company Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 29, 2022
Plaintiff Has Failed to Establish Standing “It is well-established that the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the court’s jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.” Brandt v. … (“Unlike the F404 A/B Liner prints . . . which clearly mark the center axis -AP- on the drawing views this print indicates only the horizontal axis . . . .”)
Cited 0 timesPublishedThe Portland Mint v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 28, 2022
days does not qualify; here there is the additional fact that the ‘following-year producer’ requirement serves no useful purpose. … Holmes and relied on by plaintiff establish only that Mr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedGoodgame v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 17, 2021
“An abuse of discretion may be found when (1) the court’s decision is clearly unreasonable, arbitrary, or fanciful; (2) the decision is based on an erroneous conclusion of the law; (3) the court’s findings are clearly erroneous … of an express medical opinion on causation is not necessarily dispositive of whether a claim has a reasonable basis, especially when the case is in its early stages and counsel may not have had the opportunity to retain qualified
Cited 0 timesPublishedSharpe v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 18, 2019
Petitioner stated that L.M. had not reacted to her previous immunizations she received in the fall. Id. … The Special Master began by examining whether petitioner had suffered a pre-vaccination encephalopathy sufficient to qualify for a post-vaccination aggravation claim.
Cited 0 timesPublished97 Fed. Cl. 757 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 7, 2011
and expressly limits or qualifies the interest conveyed.” … or qualifies the interest granted.”
Cited 8 timesPublished99 Fed. Cl. 21 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 29, 2011
sovereign immunity as to the types of claims allowed. … Cl. 94, 99 , 612 F.2d 533, 536 (1979) (“[T]he counts naming private individuals are clearly *26 outside our jurisdiction.”); Nat’l City Bank v.
Cited 7 timesPublishedStrone v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 13, 2020
Petitioner’s symptoms began approximately 16 weeks, (112 days)8 after flu vaccination, and clearly fall outside of the table. … In non-table GBS claims, Special Masters have not awarded compensation when onset occurs more than two months after vaccination because it is not medically plausible for the immune response to take this long.
Cited 0 timesPublishedStockton East Water District v. United States
75 Fed. Cl. 321 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 20, 2007
The court concluded that “the contract is not immune from subsequently enacted statutes,” because it did not surrender in “unmistakable terms” Congress’ sovereign immunity, and, thus, “nothing in the contract precludes [a … “Waivers of the Government’s sovereign immunity, to be effective, must be unequivocally expressed.” United States v.
Modified by Stockton East Water District v. United States, 76 Fed. Cl. 470 (2007)Cited 20 timesPublishedGarner v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · May 3, 2017
He further opined that adjuvants contained in the vaccines (intended to prompt a greater immune response) could also possibly help induce autoimmunity. Id. This theory Dr. … In attempting to establish entitlement to a Vaccine Program award of compensation for a Non-Table claim (which is the kind of claim asserted in this matter), a petitioner must satisfy all three of the elements established
Cited 0 timesPublished74 Fed. Cl. 749 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 12, 2006
DX 3 at 3 (stating that Farm 3 qualified for the good-faith exemption under 7 C.F.R. § 12 ); see also DX 2 at 4 (same, but discussing Farm 2); DX 1 at 1 (same, but discussing Farm 1). … Once the court’s subject matter jurisdiction is put into question, it is “incumbent upon [plaintiff] to come forward with evidence establishing the court’s jurisdic-tion____ [Plaintiff] bears the burden of establishing subject
Cited 3 timesPublishedCity Line Joint Venture v. United States
71 Fed. Cl. 486 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 26, 2006
Such a sale could fail, for example, if no qualified purchasers were found within a 15-month period or if a qualified purchaser were ultimately unable to proceed with the transaction. 12 U.S.C. § 4114 (a)(2). … Establishing a Regulatory Taking Having established the ripeness of plaintiffs claim, we now turn to the question of whether the statutory restrictions on plaintiffs right to prepayment constitute a taking of property for
Cited 3 timesPublishedHoffman v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 1, 2024
He argues: “The lack of a proven pathway is an issue for those concerned with scientific certainty; biologic plausibility has clearly been achieved, at least for the foremost experts on the condition.” … a) Flu Infections, Flu Vaccines, and CIDP CIDP is considered an “immune-mediated neuropathy.” Exhibit 30 at 9. This means that a person’s immune system attacks components of the nervous system.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedGarrison v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 27, 2019
alleged that as a result of a meningococcal B vaccine received on August 9, 2016, she suffered injuries including vision change, nausea, numbness in her legs and feet, cognitive changes, allergies, headaches, and a weakened immune … The information in the record, does not establish entitlement to compensation. On November 5, 2019, petitioner filed a motion for a decision dismissing the petition. Petitioner’s Motion (“Pet. Mot.”)
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedHitt v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 20, 2020
He also combined these two assertions, reasoning “given that transverse myelitis can be the first presentation of Multiple Sclerosis, it follows that a vaccine can trigger an immune response that ultimately can result in … Donofrio qualified his opinion in several respects. Dr. Donofrio admitted that the weakness may not show a neurologic problem and “there may not be a specific neurologic problem.” Tr. 151-53. Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCaruso v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 6, 2018
The Special Master expanded on this by stating that the fact witness testimony “was not sufficiently corroborated by other circumstantial evidence to elevate it over contemporaneous record proof that clearly establishes a … Caruso’s March 9, 2013 journal entry, the Special Master clearly evaluated its relevance in establishing an onset period.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDempsey v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 21, 2017
Thus, Petitioners’ claim clearly fails under Althen Prong 1. C. Petitioners have failed to establish Prong 2 of Althen in this case. … Thus, Petitioners have clearly failed to establish Prong 3 as well. E. This is not a close case.
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna