Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
0.78s
HARGROVE v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 21, 2023
Kinsbourne also cited Andermann and Robb,35 stating that “absence status is a clearly recognizable seizure pattern but by no means a uniform one. … Kinsbourne agreed that A.F.M.’s first EEG (May 13, 2014) was normal, her second EEG was abnormal, and her third EEG clearly showed epileptic encephalopathy. Tr. 17.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 15, 2021
BOP sought to establish a Bureau-wide single-award Blanket Purchase Agreement (“BPA”) to acquire these services. AR 59. … The Agency advised LIS that there was a “deficiency in [its] proposal,” as LIS “did not provide documentation that clearly states all languages requested in the SOW are available.” AR 540–42.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 11, 2025
Discussion “Except to the extent it has waived its immunity, the Government is immune from claims for attorney’s fees.” Ruckelshaus v. Sierra Club, 463 U.S. 680, 685 (1983) (citations omitted). … the case doctrine when there is “the discovery of new and different material evidence that was not presented in the prior action, or an intervening change of controlling legal authority, or when the prior deci- sion is clearly
Cited 0 timesPublishedSokol v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 4, 2020
Small would be more qualified than Dr. Messé. However, this point is purely hypothetical as Dr. Messé stated that he restricts his testimony to cases involving strokes. … Small’s theory suffers from several weaknesses that ultimately render the theory unreliable for the purposes of establishing a causal connection.6 C. Dr. Small did not establish that Mr.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedFifth Third Bank v. United States
71 Fed. Cl. 56 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 26, 2006
Third, “the measure of damages must be reasonably certain, although if ‘a reasonable probability of damage can be clearly established, uncertainty as to the amount will not preclude recovery.’ ” Id. at 1267 (quoting Glendale … Th[is] conelusion[ ] [is] not clearly erroneous.”).
Cited 7 timesPublishedProwest Diversified, Inc. v. United States
42 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,204 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 19, 1997
Section 611, entitled “Interest,” merely establishes the first date that the government must pay interest and at what rate. It does not refer to costs. … In Pierce , the Court stated that: [T]he exception for “limited availability of qualified attorneys for the proceedings involved” must refer to attorneys “qualified for the proceedings” in some specialized sense, rather than
Cited 0 timesPublishedHodge v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 4, 2022
Hodge qualified for equitable tolling. Ruling, 2015 WL 9685916 (Dec. 21, 2015). … Hodge’s nervous system and caused persistent inflammation as the immune system attempted to eradicate the spirochete.
Cited 0 timesPublishedMw Builders, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 5, 2018
Cl. 1928) (“If it was included by the terms of the settlement it is clearly a mutual mistake, and the settlement contract may be reformed. This, we think, is unnecessary. … MW Builders also contends that the other precedential decisions support the argument that, notwithstanding the unambiguous nature of the release, extrinsic evidence should be admissible to establish the parties’ intent.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 23, 2022
A motion to transfer is not “in the interest of justice” where the associated claims clearly lack merit. See Bey v. United States, 153 Fed. Cl. 814, 820 (2021) (citing Spencer v. United States, 98 Fed. … Plaintiff cannot expand the scope of the APA’s waiver of sovereign immunity simply by choosing to forego a remedy that it could (but would rather not) pursue.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedG4s Secure Integration LLC v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 16, 2022
For this solicitation, as established above, the plain language clearly provides, and the government does not seem to contest, that a joint venture partner is an “offeror.” … Here Plaintiffs have established irreparable harm, as explained above.
Cited 0 timesPublishedArizona Public Service Co. v. United States
93 Fed. Cl. 384 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 18, 2010
However, such costs must be established according to the standards and burdens described in this Opinion. … Proper circumstances for award in that case was debt that is “directly traceable [and] clearly in connection with” the Government’s breach. Id.
Cited 7 timesPublishedCaredio v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 22, 2021
The petitioners note that “the Federal Circuit has held it generally inappropriate to rely on demeanor to discount the testimony of an otherwise qualified expert.” (ECF 73 at 7 (citing Porter v. Sec’y of Health & Hum. … “Homology does not inexorably lead to disease”; instead, homology “frequently exists without resulting in autoimmune injury, since the immune system usually is able to prevent an autoimmune cross-reaction, or delete the immune
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDalles Irrigation District v. United States
82 Fed. Cl. 346 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 27, 2008
The court of appeals determined that “there is ‘law to apply1 clearly evident on the face of the statute itself,” because the Secretary is given a very specific directive that “no sales contracts shall be made unless, ‘in … The United States has explicitly waived sovereign immunity in cases where a party seeks to "join the United States as a necessary party defendant in any suit to adjudicate, confirm, validate, or decree the contractual rights
Cited 10 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 25, 2019
And invocation of such intimate topics may still fail to qualify for use of pseudonyms. E.g., Doe v. Merritt Hospitality, LLC, 353 F. Supp. 3d 472, 474-75, 482 (E.D. … It is also questionable why only federal employees should enjoy immunity from RCFC 10(a).
Cited 0 timesPublishedWood v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 11, 2019
invoice containing charges for reviewing minute entries, stating “Plaintiff's counsel is instructed to cease charging for administrative tasks at the attorney's hourly rate and to cease overcompensating himself for tasks that clearly … Byers is testifying within her specialty, she has relied upon questionable logic and ignored well- established science when that science contradicts her opinion.
Cited 0 timesPublishedTrax International Corporation v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 27, 2019
In one of the three letters, the Army expressed “a concern about the proposed fringe benefits for part time (PT) employees and the impact it will have on retaining qualified personnel.” AR Tab 14a at 6136. … “As the incumbent,” the SSEB observed, TRAX “should clearly understand the requirement but their deliberate plan appears unrealistic.” Id.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDCMS-ISA, Inc. v. United States
84 Fed. Cl. 501 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 14, 2008
Of those thirteen, eleven involved teaming arrangements between SDVOSB prime contractors and larger, established security guard businesses. 4 Id. at 1769,1839 . … but that the magnitude of the effort under Pond’s other two past performance references was significantly smaller and less complex than the proposed FPS contract in that the guards were unarmed and were not trained and qualified
Cited 16 timesPublished77 Fed. Cl. 605 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 27, 2007
The preface to the report clearly states: “[i]n spite of the large amount of work accomplished by the IPET and others, it is important to recognize that the body of knowledge that has been generated is not complete and much … United States., 1 Cl.Ct. 620 , 628 n. 1 (Cl.Ct.1982) (discussing limits of § 702(c) immunity in relation to flood control projects, and finding it inapplicable to cases involving a taking).
Cited 11 timesPublishedBluebonnet Savings Bank, F.S.B. v. United States
43 Fed. Cl. 69 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 2, 1999
The first is that two rulings in the prior District Court litigation establish that Mr. Fail and CFSB are parties. The second is that, regardless, Mr. … The dividend forbearance, tied to the Capital Plan numbers, is spelled out quite explicitly and clearly in the first two substantive paragraphs of the document.
Reversed on other grounds by Bluebonnet Savings Bank, F.S.B., Stone Capital, Inc. (Formerly Known as Cfsb Corporation), and James M. Fail v. United States, 266 F.3d 1348 (2001)Cited 20 timesPublished97 Fed. Cl. 443 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 18, 2011
Verbeck’s claim that she was entitled to disability separation, the Board stated that it was “neither qualified to make a medical determination of [Ms. … Verbeek argues that the Board’s decision was arbitrary and capricious because “none of the behavioral incidents [cited as cause for her termination] were made a part of [her] COERs which clearly established that [her] ratings
Cited 19 timesPublished
Ask Donna