Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filtersuscfc

6,911 results

0.96s

  • People of the State of California Ex Rel. Edmund G. Brown Jr., Attorney General of the State of California v. United States

    122 Fed. Cl. 315 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 16, 2015

    Co. v. United States, (No. 07-157C), 105 Fed. Cl. 420 (2012) and California ex rel. Brown v. United States, (No. 07-184C), 105 Fed. … Brown v. United States, 110 Fed. Cl. at 140). The Government has not “provide[d] any reason why that order may be reconsidered now.” Pl. Resp. at 11.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Todd Construction, L.P. v. United States

    88 Fed. Cl. 235 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 22, 2009

    See Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621, 624 (Fed.Cir.1997); Wheeler v. United States, 11 F.3d 156, 159 (Fed.Cir.1993); Doe v. United States, 372 F.3d 1308, 1313-14 (Fed.Cir.2004); Lion Raisins, Inc. v. … to an issue not raised before the board, Harris v.

    Cited 29 timesPublished
  • Panasonic Communications Corp. of America v. United States

    99 Fed. Cl. 422 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 6, 2011

    See Brown Bear v. Cuna Mut. Group, 266 F.R.D. 310, 320 (D.S.D.2009). … See, e.g., Alpha v.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Zhengxing v. United States

    71 Fed. Cl. 732 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 9, 2006

    Joshua v. United States, 17 F.3d 378, 379 (Fed.Cir.1994). The Court also does not have jurisdiction to hear claims against the United States for damages arising in tort. 28 U.S.C. § 1491 (a)(1) (2000); see also Brown v. … Daniels v.

    Cited 70 timesPublished
  • Palafox Street Associates, L.P. v. United States

    114 Fed. Cl. 773 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 12, 2014

    Ashcroft v. Iqbal (Iqbal), 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. … Ford- 19 Clifton, 661 F.3d at 660; see Brown v.

    Cited 20 timesPublished
  • Bernard v. United States

    59 Fed. Cl. 497 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 22, 2004

    See Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621, 623 (Fed.Cir.1997). Therefore, the court denies plaintiffs motion to amend in this part. … that the Board’s findings were unsupported by substantial evidence).

    Cited 253 timesPublished
  • Moody v. United States

    58 Fed. Cl. 522 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 18, 2003

    On July 18,1994, the board of inquiry recommended that plaintiff be involuntarily separated from the Corps; a board of review concurred with these results on May 18, 1995. … United States, 41 Fed.Cl. 631, 645 (1998) (finding no jurisdiction when plaintiff resigned in the face of a recommendation for administrative discharge); Brown v.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Christian J. Wurst Iii v. United States

    111 Fed. Cl. 683 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 19, 2013

    On September 5, 2011, Plaintiff applied for employment with the TVA for the position of Electrical Engineering Design at the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Athens, Alabama. Compl. at 7. … United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535, 538 (1980) (quoting United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 398 (1976)).

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Heim v. United States

    50 Fed. Cl. 225 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 10, 2001

    Franconia Assocs. v. United States, 240 F.3d 1358, 1362 (Fed.Cir.2001), reh’g and reh’g en banc denied (Jun 12, 2001); Alder Terrace, Inc. v. United States, 161 F.3d at 1376-77 ; Brown Park Estates-Fairfield Dev. Co. v. … Bank v. United States, 215 F.3d 1304, 1310 (Fed.Cir.2000), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1070 , 121 S.Ct. 759 , 148 L.Ed.2d 661 (2001); Brown Park Estates-Fairfield Dev. Co. v.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • RCS Enterprises, Inc. v. United States

    46 Fed. Cl. 509 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 26, 2000

    Co. v. United States, 832 F.2d 574, 579 (Fed.Cir.1987)), and the court may not resort to extrinsic evidence to interpret them, see Interwest Constr. v. Brown, 29 F.3d 611, 615 (Fed.Cir.1994) (citations omitted). … Jan. 24, 2000) (table); Robin Indus., Inc. v. United States, 29 Fed.Cl. 122, 127 (1993) (“Boards of contract appeals have uniformly refused to review the propriety of a VECP rejection.”)

    Cited 43 timesPublished
  • Exnicios v. United States

    United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 11, 2018

    Plaintiff called Colonel Todd Brown, who operated the Foreign Area Officer training program plaintiff attended in Germany in 2008, as a witness. … In an Officer Evaluation Report completed by Colonel Brown after he had counseled plaintiff, which was included in the record before the Field Board of Inquiry, Colonel Brown stated that plaintiff “is in the top 4 of 10 foreign

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Hodges v. United States

    35 Fed. Cl. 68 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 5, 1996

    See Voge v. … Moreover, the function of administrative boards is primarily investigative. See Brown v. United States, 184 Ct.Cl. 501, 510-11 , 396 F.2d 989, 995-96 (1968) (noting that board hearings are investigatory in nature).

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Kosmo v. United States

    72 Fed. Cl. 46 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 25, 2006

    See Brown Park Estates-Fairfield Dev. Co. v. United States, 127 F.3d 1449 , 1457 (Fed.Cir.1997); Wells v. United States, 420 F.3d 1343, 1345-46 (Fed.Cir.2005). … Richey v.

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Henderson v. United States

    United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 25, 2021

    Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621, 623 (Fed. Cir. 1997); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(1) (conferring jurisdiction over limited categories of cases “not sounding in tort”). … A hearing before the board is a mandatory remedy, meaning that a plaintiff may not bring suit in this Court until the board renders a final decision. See Friedman v. United States, 159 Ct.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Robbins v. United States

    29 Fed. Cl. 717 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 9, 1993

    Brown in Atlanta, Georgia. He was on civil service status at this point in time. He did not have a good take of his fusion and the area did not fuse. … As stated in Harris v.

    Cited 13 timesPublished
  • Kennedy v. United States

    124 Fed. Cl. 309 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 30, 2015

    Brown, 102 F.3d 1236, 1243 (Fed. Cir. 1996). Nevertheless, the Court of Federal Claims and other Article I courts traditionally have applied the “case or controversy” justiciability doctrines. See id.; Anderson v. … Cl. 144 (2015) (reviewing a correction board decision that had been issued pursuant to a remand order); Johnson v. United States, 97 Fed.

    Reversed on other grounds by Kennedy v. United States, 845 F.3d 1376 (2017)Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Major W.D. Foster v. United States

    111 Fed. Cl. 658 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 3, 2013

    After receiving the third denial letter, Major Foster appealed to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (“ABCMR”). … Hamlet v. United States, 873 F.2d 1414, 1416 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (citing Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974)).

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Carter v. United States

    62 Fed. Cl. 66 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 10, 2004

    Referral to Physical Evaluation Board.” Finally, the Medical Board concluded by “eoncurfing] with the above diagnosis. … See Brown v.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Golding v. United States

    48 Fed. Cl. 697 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 1, 2001

    See Long v. United States, 12 Cl.Ct. 174 , 175-76 & 176 n. 1 (1987) (“The [Brown v. … (citing Brown v. United States, 184 Ct.Cl. 501, 512 , 396 F.2d 989, 995 (1968) (footnote omitted)).

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • Mark S. Rasmuson and Brenda S. Rasmuson, Husband and Wife v. United States

    109 Fed. Cl. 267 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 8, 2013

    Hall, 72 N.W. 427 (Iowa 1897) and Brown v. … (citing Brown, 29 N.W. at 941).

    Cited 24 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.