Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
1.49s
116 Fed. Cl. 691 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 14, 2014
The Tucker Act confers jurisdiction on this court and waives sovereign immunity, ge Greenlee Cnty., Ariz. v. United States, 487 F.3d 871, 875 (Fed. … In the context of a military pay case, the plaintiff s burden is to show, by "cogent and clearly convincing evidence," Prochazka v. United States, 90 Fed.
Cited 5 timesPublished27 Fed. Cl. 235 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 3, 1992
Plaintiffs maintain that on their return the line, “property qualified for investment credit, life years 7 or more— new” fulfills the function of notifying the I.R.S. of the grounds for their claim. … Clearly they do not. No indication is made of what type of expense the deduction reflects.
Cited 13 timesPublishedCircle Line-Statue of Liberty Ferry, Inc. v. United States
76 Fed. Cl. 490 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 14, 2007
In plaintiffs view, a contract term is implied if it was “clearly in the contemplation of the parties” at the time they negotiated the contract, even if the parties “deemed it unnecessary” to place the term in the contract … But where, as here, a plaintiff seeks to enforce a contract right and has an established history of operation, any remedy would be in contract and any damages would be readily provable.
Cited 5 timesPublishedVons Companies, Inc. v. United States
55 Fed. Cl. 709 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 28, 2003
Finally, to be sure, there is a recognized exception to the foregoing rules, established in Int’l Bus. Mach. v. … Section 404(a)(1) also provides rules governing the maximum amount of deductible contributions to qualified plans.
Cited 2 timesPublishedMarathon Targets, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 21, 2025
Brooks had “clearly manufactured” the evidence to support his company’s use of the protected information to challenge the TMIT award. See AR 3464. … The Government and MVP respond that the requirements are clearly laid out in the PWS. See ECF No. 49 at 31; ECF No. 50 at 38–39.
Cited 0 timesPublishedGoodwin v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 1, 2023
Regarding the AAN criteria for a “clearly defined sensory 9 level,” Dr. … Akbari’s theories about autoreactive immune responses could not be established to a reasonable degree of medical probability. Id. at 348. Dr. Tompkins identified the Sutjita study as the “crux” of Dr.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedGoodwin v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 16, 2023
Regarding the AAN criteria for a “clearly defined sensory 9 level,” Dr. … Akbari’s theories about autoreactive immune responses could not be established to a reasonable degree of medical probability. Id. at 348. Dr. Tompkins identified the Sutjita study as the “crux” of Dr.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedCitizens Federal Bank, FSB v. United States
59 Fed. Cl. 507 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 23, 2004
(“There is sufficient evidence to establish that FIRREA was at least a substantial factor in plaintiffs increased costs. … The Court reaffirmed in LaSalle, “if a reasonable probability of damage can be clearly established, uncertainty as to the amount will not preclude recovery.” LaSalle, 317 F.3d at 1374 (Fed.Cir.2003).
Cited 27 timesPublishedNielsen-Dillingham Builders, J.V. v. United States
43 Fed. Cl. 5 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 6, 1999
Reference to manufacturers and suppliers is intended to establish the standards of performance and quality.” 1 The paragraphs that follow the *8 foregoing mandate establish the technical and performance standards for “Workstation … A fact qualifies as material if it would affect the outcome of the case. See id. at 248 , 106 S.Ct. 2505 .
Cited 15 timesPublishedCaroline Hunt Trust Estate v. United States
65 Fed. Cl. 271 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 29, 2005
Consideration Consideration was clearly exchanged here. … “We have noted that if a reasonable probability of damage can be clearly established, uncertainty as to the amount will not preclude recovery, and the court’s duty is to make a fair and reasonable approximation of damages
Reversed in part, on other grounds by Caroline Hunt Trust Estate v. United States, 470 F.3d 1044 (2006)Cited 11 timesPublished46 Fed. Cl. 480 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 14, 2000
Once jurisdiction is challenged by the court or the opposing party, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction. McNutt v. … United States, 847 F.2d 786, 788 (Fed.Cir.1988) (“It is a general rule of statutory construction that where Congress has clearly stated its intent in the language of a statute, a court should not inquire further.”), cer t
Cited 7 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 14, 2019
and IV of the amended complaint upon the grounds that: (1) the Court does not possess subject-matter jurisdiction to consider plaintiff’s quantum meruit claim and (2) the Tucker Act’s waiver of the government’s sovereign immunity … And so, the Court does not find the MSC’s actions to be clearly wrong or run afoul of the requirements of Section 5348, as plaintiff suggests.
Cited 0 timesPublishedHeinze v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 25, 2015
Respondent stated that petitioners’ claim that J.H. suffers from “immune dysregulation” is unsupported by the records. Id. at 5. … Petitioners allege that the MMR vaccine caused J.H. to suffer immune dysregulation resulting in erythema multiforme. The medical records do not demonstrate that J.H. was diagnosed with immune dysregulation.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedLarue v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 4, 2026
See Monique Leahy, 7 Attorneys Medical Advisor § 58:17. 3 GBS is “a rare disorder in which your body’s immune system attacks your nerves. Weakness and tingling in your hands and feet are usually the first symptoms.” … decision, the parties shall file a Joint Status Report indicating their agreement with the proposed redactions, attaching a copy of those pages of the Court’s ruling containing proposed redactions, with all proposed redactions clearly
Cited 0 timesPublished33 Fed. Cl. 45 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 31, 1995
Plaintiff contends that the return of his family from Portland, Oregon, to Denver, Colorado, after completion of work for the Foreign Broadcast Intelligence Service, qualifies as relocation under the Act; and that, notwithstanding … Clearly, Portland, Oregon was within the Military Zone, and thus, plaintiff, being a citizen of Japanese ancestry was not allowed to be in this exclusion area.
Cited 5 timesPublished90 Fed. Cl. 456 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 8, 2009
ESG was established in 1951 to provide services for defense-related electronic systems and subsystems. … Most of ESG’s employees were covered under the Westinghouse Qualified Pension Plan (“WPP”), a qualified pension plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) and the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”).
Cited 1 timesPublishedMilliren v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 9, 2024
Although clearly easier to meet than the preponderant standard required for compensation, “courts have struggled with the nature and quantum of evidence necessary to establish a reasonable basis.” Wirtshafter v. … In fact, Petitioner’s primary care physician clearly stated that he “in no way” believed that the vaccine caused Petitioner’s symptoms. Ex. 19 at 52.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 8, 2018
Meissner responded After a complete review of 26 USC, the IRC [Internal Revenue Code], and case law, the erroneously allege [sic] "wages" by the payer are clearly not those described in section … Cl. 54, 60 (2017) ('To establish jurisdiction, Plaintiff must establish that he filed an administrative refund claim with the IRS prior to filing suit in this Court."); Fremuth v. United States, 129 Fed.
Cited 0 timesPublished65 Fed. Cl. 826 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 16, 2005
they may stay on active duty until they qualify for retirement. 10 U.S.C. §§ 631 , 632 (2000). … As the Christian court recognized: “The doctrine of ‘harmless error’ is a well-established settled principle of federal law.” 337 F.3d at 1342 (discussing Texas v.
Cited 4 timesPublished51 Fed. Cl. 818 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 13, 2002
. § 1491 , effected a limited waiver of sovereign immunity with respect to certain classes of cases and specific types of relief available against the United States in this court. … The contention that the Army’s failure to grant plaintiff disability retirement was in violation of applicable regulations is clearly justiciable by this court.
Cited 28 timesPublished
Ask Donna