Case law

Herms v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 29, 2024

Brawer opined the assessments “clearly excluded a multiple of other potential causes for [Petitioner’s] hearing loss.” Id. at 1-2. Dr. … Standards for Adjudication The Vaccine Act was established to compensate vaccine-related injuries and deaths. § 10(a).

In Re Downstream Addicks and Barker (Texas) Flood-Control Reservoirs v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 22, 2026

First, the Federal Circuit asked the Court to address whether the Induced Surcharges qualify as a temporary taking. Id. … In this case, where defendant is culpable for creating conditions it believes constituted an emergency, “the government immunity from liability under the necessity doctrine would stretch the doctrine too far.”

American Airlines, Inc. v. United States

75 Fed. Cl. 237 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 30, 2006

So there clearly is at least one other way to collect, and we don’t know just what— THE COURT: What specifically do you want to do? … Therefore, to the extent the Government is now seeking discovery to establish a counterclaim or set off, that time has passed.

Easley v. United States

31 Fed. Cl. 129 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 28, 1994

This court will overturn such determinations only if “the [plaintiff] shows by cogent and clearly convincing evidence that such determinations are arbitrary, capricious or not supported by substantial evidence.” Finn v. … The New York Heart Association has established four classes of heart disease according to the extent of a patient’s functional capacity. Class 3 heart disease involves "[m]arked limitation of physical activity.

Hughes Communications Galaxy, Inc. v. United States

40 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,906 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 30, 1995

None of Hughes’ HC-series satellites qualified for national security, foreign policy, or shuttle-unique status. … Hughes does not dispute that its satellites do not qualify for this category. .

Jemal's Lazriv Water, LLC v. United States

114 Fed. Cl. 512 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 19, 2013

Any tax assessment by the OTR, according to Plaintiff’s definition, will qualify as a full assessment because the OTR always considers the improvements that still need to be made to a property when it calculates lease-up … The ultimate aim of contract interpretation is to arrive at a definition that most clearly reflects the original intentions of the parties. Alliant Techsystems Inc. v. United States, 74 Fed. Cl. 566, 576 (2007).

Davis v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

105 Fed. Cl. 627 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 29, 2012

This, in turn, triggered an immune response from the body which resulted in damage to the myelin. See Tr. 20:24 to 21:10, 22:19-25, 68:14-21 (Sept. 15, 2009). The government’s expert, Dr. … Davis’s ease, the special master in Calise found that the petitioner had established causation and was entitled to compensation. Id. at *28.

Laforge & Budd Construction Co. v. United States

48 Fed. Cl. 566 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 2, 2001

Again, plaintiff ascribes that action to its being a small business lacking other qualified personnel to run the project it assigned to Mr. Abbott. … Defendant reads the record as clearly showing that its ability either to inquire into or apprise itself of the facts surrounding this case has been significantly impaired.

Marcus v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 16, 2025

She said she was clearly asked this question by Dr. Peterson, and she clearly said there was no trauma or inciting even leading to the onset of her pain.” Resp’t Ex. B at 6. However, the records from Dr. … of immune cells involved in the skin’s innate immune response are dendritic leukocytes: Langerhans cells in the epidermis and dermal dendritic cells in the dermis.”

Chippewa Cree Tribe of Rocky Boy's Reservation v. United States

85 Fed. Cl. 646 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 10, 2009

The facts of this case are analogous to cases in which courts have clearly stated that it is outside the scope of them authority to entertain disputes brought by individuals contesting Congressional determinations as to tribal … At the outset, the court notes that it has already found that Proposed Intervenors’ interest in gaining status as PJF beneficiaries does not qualify as a direct and immediate legally protectable interest in this litigation

Graves v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 7, 2022

Because the Tucker Act only waives sovereign immunity and does not create substantive rights, a plaintiff must identify a separate source of law that can be fairly interpreted as creating a right to money damages. … For example, a physical takings claim regularly accrues on “the date on which the plaintiff’s land has been clearly and permanently taken.” Boling, 220 F.3d at 1370 (citing Seldovia Native Assoc., Inc. v.

B.E. Meyers & Co. v. United States

41 Fed. Cl. 729 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 27, 1998

has not been addressed by the Court of Federal Claims or by the Federal Circuit in the context of a patent-infringement case brought under 28 U.S.C. § 1498 . 6 The Third Circuit has stated the following test: In order to establish … “Where attorneys for parties having a mutual interest in litigation exchange their work product, it remains protected by a qualified privilege.” Id.

James M. Langan, Jr., as the of the Estate of Eleanor F. Langan v. United States

111 Fed. Cl. 654 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 28, 2013

A filing deadline for a claim against the United States “is a condition to the waiver of sovereign immunity and thus must be strictly construed.” Irwin v. … Clearly plaintiff is not entitled to a presumption of timely filing.

Thomas v. United States

122 Fed. Cl. 53 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 30, 2015

Thomas did not qualify for LQA under paragraph 7a(3) of AER 690-500.592 because the assumption of services by CHRA-E did not constitute a “transfer” of the employee involved. In addition, Mr. … Therefore, to qualify for LQA, Mr. Thomas must have met the requirements of DSSR §§ 031.12a and b. Mr.

Delbert Wheeler Construction, Inc. v. United States

42 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,257 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 3, 1997

Defendant alleges that plaintiff cannot have standing because it could not have qualified for award of the contract in light of the mandate of 33 U.S.C. § 624 , which states that the Army Corps of Engineers shall not award … The evaluation was conducted according to the solicitation, which clearly explains and states the order of importance of each criteria.

Meidl v. United States

100 Fed. Cl. 1 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 10, 2011

However, the case law clearly establishes that when a Soldier waives his right to challenge the findings of an informal PEB, he waives his right to challenge the informal PEB findings in the United States Court of Federal … If the MEB finds that a Soldier is not medically qualified for retention, it will recommend referral to a Physical Evaluation Board. Id. .

Barrett Refining Corp. v. United States

42 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,390 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 2, 1998

For each of the disputed contracts, Barrett was qualified as a small disadvantaged business (“SDB”) concern. 3 A. … Barrett was not qualified under the set-aside program of section 8(a) of the Small Business Act, 15 U.S.C. § 637 (a) (1994). .

Curran v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 22, 2016

On October 27, 2016, petitioner filed his immunization records and other medical records, but stated that petitioner was still “in the process of obtaining remaining records.” … conclusion of the law;” (3) “clearly erroneous,” or (4) that “the record contains no evidence on which the ...

Filler v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · May 8, 2020

As a waiver of the United States’ sovereign immunity from suit, § 1498 “must be strictly construed in favor of the United States.” Zoltek Corp. v. United States, 672 F.3d 1309, 1318 (Fed. … Plaintiffs thus fail to qualify for this exception to the Assignment of Claims Act. ii.

Sharpe v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 7, 2021

Thus, a medical treater’s opinion that a vaccine likely caused a person’s injury might have some Althen prong one bearing (although less so than an expert qualified to opine on causation in a specific case), with the opposite … Clearly the significance of Dr.