Case law

Rochlis v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 14, 2020

Based on the above, the Landow court reasoned that the plaintiff “clearly had knowledge of facts” that fraud might have been committed. See id. … Defendant contends that: While the record establishes that Mr.

In Re Farmers Insurance Exchange, Claims Representatives' Overtime Pay Litigation, Dave Miller, on Behalf of Himself and the Class Members in Mdl Case No. 1439 v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, and Farmers Group, Inc. Plan Administrator of the Farmers Group, Inc. Profit Sharing Savings Plan Trust Plan Administrator of the Farmers Group, Inc. Employees' Pension Plan, in Re Farmers Insurance Exchange, Claims Representatives' Overtime Pay Litigation, Dave Miller, on Behalf of Himself and the Class Members in Mdl Case No. 1439 v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, and Farmers Group, Inc. Plan Administrator of the Farmers Group, Inc. Profit Sharing Savings Plan Trust Plan Administrator of the Farmers Group, Inc. Employees' Pension Plan, in Re Farmers Insurance Exchange, Claims Representatives' Overtime Pay Litigation, Jesse Corralez, on Behalf of Himself and the Class Members in Mdl Case No. 1439 v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, and Farmers Group, Inc. Plan Administrator of the Farmers Group, Inc. Profit Sharing Savings Plan Trust Plan Administrator of the Farmers Group, Inc. Employees' Pension Plan, in Re Farmers Insurance Exchange, Claims Representatives' Overtime Pay Litigation

481 F.3d 1119 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 26, 2006

[T]he purpose behind the FLSA is to establish a national floor under which wage protections cannot drop, not to establish absolute uniformity in minimum wage and overtime standards nationwide at levels established in the … Neither party has shown that any of those findings were clearly erroneous. See Cleveland v.

Nichols v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 26, 2018

Given that the Nicholses filed this case in 2008 and the case now includes 12 expert reports, the litigation process clearly has been neither a quick nor easy experience for the Nicholses. … Kelso, Allergic Reactions After Immunization, 110 Annals Allergy Asthma Immunology 397 (2013)) at 398. With this time frame established, Dr.

Parkwood Associates Ltd. Partnership v. United States

97 Fed. Cl. 809 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 8, 2011

As to the former point, it is well-established that a breach arises when an obligated party fails to render performance when due. … The court clearly signaled that a different result would obtain in a case such as this, stating that “[w]hen no time for performance is specified and one party performs, the non-performing party is not in breach of the contract

Walters v. United States

37 Fed. Cl. 215 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 28, 1997

Certificate of Release from Active Duty to authorize VSIP pay for him; 3) military education credit and promotion because of his wrongful separation; 4) assignment of a RE *218 code; and 5) credit for service time sufficient to qualify … In the instant case, the Secretary of the Army established the ABCMR and gave it such discretionary authority. See 32 C.F.R. § 581.3 (1996). Through the ABCMR, the Army acted and rendered its decision.

Cupey Bajo Nursing Home, Inc. v. United States

40 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,952 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 24, 1996

And yet plaintiff fails to point to any such approval or other indication that would lead Cupey Bajo into believing such approval was supplied by HUD. 25 Indeed, the foregoing correspondence clearly establishes that HUD required … over which this court clearly lacks subject matter jurisdiction.

Linda Newman Construction Co. v. United States

48 Fed. Cl. 231 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 13, 2000

Santa Fe and Reliance are significant for the disposition of this ease insofar as they establish that a contractor is not necessarily entitled to recover delay overhead costs. … Defendant told plaintiff that it could recover the costs of unchanged work, but plaintiff has not shown that the parties ever agreed that delay overhead qualified as one of the costs of unchanged work.

City of Gettysburg v. United States

64 Fed. Cl. 429 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 16, 2005

Maritrans has various rights in its barges that qualify them as property for Fifth Amendment protection. … The burden of establishing inexcusable delay and prejudice is on the proponent and failure to prove both elements is fatal to the establishment of laches. Costello v.

Lw Construction of Charleston, LLC v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 31, 2018

Cir. 2003) (“It is well established that statutes of limitations for causes of action against the United States, being conditions on the waiver of sovereign immunity, are jurisdictional … This conversation clearly establishes the Brantley’s comprehensive control over the affairs of LW.

Land Grantors v. United States

74 Fed. Cl. 518 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 14, 2006

Therefore, even where Congress has waived sovereign immunity, United States Supreme Court has held that the “same rebuttal presumption of equitable tolling applicable to suits against private defendants should also apply … Fielding’s assistance, on April 29, 2005, the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement establishing a $25.5 million fund.

Draken International, Inc. v. United States

120 Fed. Cl. 383 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 13, 2015

ATAC argues that Draken does not have standing to bring the instant protest because it no longer qualifies for award, that no improper bundling of requirements has occurred, and that Draken’s allegations of unfair treatment … This is not to say that an agency’s procurement delay is either a matter of unfettered agency discretion or immune from judicial review.

Gorski v. United States

104 Fed. Cl. 605 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 30, 2012

United States, 40 F.3d 373, 374 (Fed.Cir.1994) (“Section 7422(a) waives the United States’ sovereign immunity from [federal tax] refund suits, provided the taxpayer has previously filed a qualifying administrative refund … Plaintiffs rely on Estate of Lis to establish that Mr. Wayne Gorski did not have a fiduciary relationship with Mr. John R. Gorski as to the State Court action, because Mr.

Syncsort Inc. v. United States

31 Fed. Cl. 545 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 24, 1994

The moving party bears the burden of establishing the absence of any genuine issue of material fact. … Where, as here, the statutory language, in pertinent part, is unambiguous, a court must interpret the statute consistent with its unambiguous language unless the legislative history demonstrates “a clearly expressed legislative

Duane Omar Burnett v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 9, 2018

This language clearly provides valuable consideration under Missouri law. See Bayless, 684 S.W.2d at 513; Brown, 152 S.W.2d at 653. … Bayless, 684 S.W.2d at 513 (holding that language stating “to have and to hold the same together with all singular rights, immunities, privileges and appurtenances to the same” conveys a fee simple interest).

Porter v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 11, 2024

Respondent argues that this “clearly” identifies the left deltoid. Rule 4(c) Report at 11; Response at 9. … However, it is also true that Petitioner’s state’s health department had already published considerations for curbside or drive-through immunization services. Reply at 6, citing Ex. 26.

HDM Corp. v. United States

69 Fed. Cl. 243 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 30, 2005

Therefore, if plaintiff had established that the crossover consolidation should have been competed, plaintiff would have established that it was irreparably harmed in being denied the opportunity to compete for the work. … This would clearly result in a serious detriment to Medicare beneficiaries who wished to participate in Part D prescription drug coverage.

G4s Secure Integration LLC v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 8, 2022

We hold only that under the particular facts of this case, the Claims Court did not clearly err in finding that Tinton Falls had a substantial chance of winning a reopened bid … The plaintiffs assert that denial of the requested injunction would benefit CGS-ORSA, which was not qualified for the award it won.

Prokopeas v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 18, 2017

At 9 months of age, [C.A.P.] appeared to have a reaction to his immunization shots. … This case clearly fits such a fact pattern, as explained above.

Accelgov, LLC v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 15, 2021

A at A13). 16 Services was a qualifying small business, eligible for an 8(a) award. (AR 770–72). … The Marine Corps clearly reviewed the RFI responses, the RFP responses, and the SBA’s proffer of United Support Services.

Poole v. United States

64 Fed. Cl. 776 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 23, 2005

In order to prevail, the plaintiff must establish “by cogent and clearly convincing evidence that the [military’s] decision was arbitrary, capricious, unsupported by substantial evidence, or contrary to applicable statutes … As noted above, to qualify for a disability retirement benefit, the Army must first determine that a soldier is not fit for service.