Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
2.12s
72 Fed. Cl. 511 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 22, 2006
“It is a clearly established principle in [equity], that whenever the trustee has been guilty of a breach of the trust, and has transferred the property, by sale or otherwise, to any third person, the [beneficiary] has a … immunity. .
Cited 10 timesPublishedMoran v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 19, 2021
He pointed to various studies into the effects of vaccines in support of his theory that no causal relationship to RA has been established, including one which revealed no exacerbation of symptoms following immunization of … The history subsequent to immunization clearly was contemporaneously documented as RA and was strongly seropositive with respect to both rheumatoid factor and CCP.
Cited 0 timesPublishedHopkins v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human Services
84 Fed. Cl. 517 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 1, 2008
Sexton evaluated Finn at the request of his parents because he was not talking clearly and he seemed to be slow in acquiring new words. … Accordingly, petitioner failed to establish the critical temporal relationship between their 4 hearing loss and immunizations, and thus, failed to establish that the vaccines in-fact caused their hearing loss.
Cited 10 timesPublishedKelly Schultz v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 30, 2013
L.S.’s claim is not barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The doctrine of “sovereign immunity” is a judge-made doctrine from which federal courts have derived certain principles of statutory construction. … And, the standards governing RCFC 20 are also clearly satisfied.
Cited 0 timesPublishedAuto Club Insurance v. United States
103 Fed. Cl. 268 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 24, 2012
As such, it is *271 an explicit waiver of the sovereign immunity of the United States. United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 398 , 96 S.Ct. 948 , 47 L.Ed.2d 114 (1976). … Otherwise, in Plaintiffs reasoning, the references to money-mandating statutes that are replete in such case precedents are merely a “shortcut expression” of the requirement of a money damages claim, which Plaintiff is clearly
Cited 4 timesPublishedA. v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 27, 2023
She attempted several nasal remedies to improve her ability to clearly inhale through her left nostril, but they did not help. Id. … may elicit immune responses to self-antigens.”
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 4, 2015
Summer had been immunized with an MMR vaccine 18 years prior, see Pet. Ex. 1 at 2, would not have precluded the alleged pathogenesis, because of “the waning of immunity following immunization.” … Clearly this is not the same condition described in his First Report, the condition from which S.E.B. clearly suffers, and which Dr. Bellanti agreed she had. And yet, Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedSystem Dynamics International, Inc. v. United States
130 Fed. Cl. 499 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 7, 2017
“It is well settled . . . that the [United States] is ordinarily immune from suit, and that it may define the conditions under which it will permit such actions.” Honda v. … For this reason, the Supreme Court has held that “[w]hen waiver legislation contains a statute of limitations, the limitations provision constitutes a condition on the waiver of sovereign immunity.” Block v. N.
Cited 6 timesPublishedIsaac v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
108 Fed. Cl. 743 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 25, 2013
It was felt that immunization series had been the trigger for the development of Guillain-Barré.” … The Special Master, therefore, concluded that Petitioner did not qualify for relief under the Vaccine Act.
Cited 266 timesPublishedPavan v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 28, 2020
More recent studies of other immune-modulating has been well established [31-36]. … However, long-term follow-up did indicate clearly effective as well.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 23, 2025
O.L.C. __, slip op. at 16.26 The same analysis clearly holds true for—and, thus, must extend to—Coast Guardsmen. … These instructions clearly differ from service members’ “entitlements” to “legal representation” and “the appointment of military counsel qualified under Article 27(b), UCMJ,” when facing an administrative discharge board
Cited 0 timesPublished54 Fed. Cl. 689 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 16, 2002
The United States enjoys immunity from suit unless Congress expressly provides otherwise. Brown v. United States, 30 Fed.Cl. 227, 229 (1993), aff'd, 26 F.3d 139 , 1994 WL 169671 (Fed.Cir.1994). … The Federal Circuit held, in no uncertain terms, that 37 U.S.C. § 204 (a) not only qualifies as a money-mandating statute for the purpose of establishing jurisdiction under the Tucker Act, id. at 1312-14 , but that an assertion
Cited 6 timesPublishedJ.L. Simmons Co. v. United States
60 Fed. Cl. 388 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 15, 2004
To qualify as a legal claim, the claim must be viable in all terms — for example, it must not be barred by the applicable statute of limitations or by some other sovereign immunity defense. See Kanehl v. … As such, though it clearly expresses a breadth of purpose to make plaintiff whole, the bill language does not fundamentally alter the nature of the inquiry here and, in particular, fails to convert what otherwise would be
Cited 3 timesPublishedMunn v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
28 Fed. Cl. 490 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 1, 1993
In this case, petitioner’s election clearly shows an intent to proceed in traditional civil litigation apart from the Program. … The language of the statute must be considered conclusive unless there is a clearly expressed legislative intent to the contrary. North Dakota v.
Cited 5 timesPublished128 Fed. Cl. 203 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 8, 2016
Pincus provided a note for plaintiff’s command stating: SPC Chi Jeun has cognitive disorder which impairs his ability to follow directions unless very clearly communication [sic] verbally or in writing. … See id. at 114 “Only a serious impediment can qualify to suspend the running of the statute.” Id. at 113.
Cited 35 timesPublishedTimothy v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 28, 2023
Gershwin] can identify within the medical records that would have led to trigeminal neuralgia,” he opines petitioner’s immunization “should have produced an immune reaction.” (Id.) Dr. … Gadipudi’s records clearly indicate the presence of facial pain (i.e., trigeminal neuralgia) plus facial spasms (i.e., hemifacial spasms). (Ex. 4, pp. 1-6.)
Cited 0 timesPublishedMcGuire v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 20, 2015
Weig lacked the training in immunology to offer a theory of how the HPV vaccine causes CDH via the immune system. Tr. 171-73. Dr. … Herzog looked for evidence of immune-mediated diseases such as lupus that could have caused headaches as a consequence of that disease but did not find any evidence of an immune-mediated process. Tr. 267. Thus, Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedMarathon Oil Co. v. United States
56 Fed. Cl. 768 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 19, 2003
Thus, the language of the Federal Circuit’s opinion and judgment, both dated December 28, 2000, clearly state that the court was affirming the prior judgments of the Court of Federal Claims, not substituting its own judgment … But Marathon and Mobil have not established their entitlement to any such interest because they cannot demonstrate a waiver of sovereign immunity by the government.
Cited 1 timesPublished130 Fed. Cl. 88 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 22, 2016
Cir. 2000) (explaining that EAJA *101 is a waiver of sovereign immunity). … was based on agency error, in order for a moving party to establish its status as a prevailing party.
Cited 2 timesPublished100 Fed. Cl. 621 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 27, 2011
Title 5 does not ignore judicial branch personnel in establishing laws relevant to the civil service. … (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3602 (a)). *636 Plaintiff argues that “Semper’s discharge without cause, if proven, clearly qualifies as an unjustified or unwarranted personnel action as envisioned by the Back Pay Act.”
Cited 5 timesPublished
Ask Donna