Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
2.66s
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 31, 2018
Alternatively, "[a]t any time during proceedings ... with respect to the removal of an officer from active duty," an officer, if otherwise qualified, may request voluntary retirement. … The Tucker Act serves as a waiver of sovereign immunity and a jurisdictional grant, but it does not create a substantive cause of action. Jan's Helicopter Serv., Inc. v. Fed. Aviation Admin., 525 F.3d 1299, 1306 (Fed.
Cited 0 timesPublishedNavajo Refining Co. v. United States
58 Fed. Cl. 200 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 27, 2003
As the court stated in La Gloria, “FAR § 52.103(b) requires that ‘[a]ny provision or clause that supplements the FAR’ must be clearly identified ‘by number, title, date, and name,’ and further requires that if such supplemental … In Beta Systems, the Federal Circuit stated: The government’s insistence during negotiations on use of [the EPA clause] in its entirety, and the contractor’s acquiescence, does not immunize the government from the consequences
Cited 5 timesPublished29 Fed. Cl. 66 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 10, 1993
This item clearly does not apply to the 1981 case. The court will allow the fees on the December 19, 1990 invoice with the exception of the first item on the invoice. See Appendix to this order. … connection with the court proceeding, except that such fees shall not be in excess of $75 per hour unless the court determines that an increase in the cost of living or a special factor, such as the limited availability of qualified
Cited 11 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 27, 2018
Cl. 54, 60 (2017) (“To establish jurisdiction Plaintiff must establish that he filed an administrative refund claim With the lRS prior to filing suit in this Court."); Fremuth v. United States 129 Fed. … United States, a judge of this court ordered the defendant to re-issue a stolen check to plaintiff pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3343 and explained that: The facts establish that Plaintiff has met the conditions established by
Cited 0 timesPublishedTessie Dingle v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 24, 2014
Petitioner filed a response on December 20, 2013, approximately one week after the deadline established in the November 15, 2013 Order. Id. … Petitioner “bears the burden of establishing the hours expended.” Wasson v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 24 Cl.
Cited 0 timesPublishedHome Federal Bank of Tennessee, F.S.B. v. United States
57 Fed. Cl. 676 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 26, 2003
Indeed, the plain language of 12 C.F.R. § 501.11 clearly indicates the limited authority of the Bank Board’s regional agents. … Muldoon testified with regards to the specific facts of this case, his answers tend to be qualified. (PL’s Resp. to Def.’s Supplemental Mem. in Opp’n to PL’s Mot. for Partial Summ.
Cited 5 timesPublished122 Fed. Cl. 315 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 16, 2015
FERC, 693 F.3d 828, 841 (9th Cir. 2012) (“FERC clearly acknowledged that it did not have authority to order refunds from the non- public utilities and explained that it was establishing just and reasonable rates in order … Instead, third-party beneficiary status may be established where the party “fall[s] within a class clearly intended to be benefited” by the contract. See Montana, 124 F.3d at 1273; see also JGB Enters., Inc. v.
Cited 1 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 30, 2020
The Federal Circuit found that this argument had no merit, but it held that the plaintiff had nonetheless established jurisdiction. … There is no indication, however, that the plaintiff knew at the time that his conditions may have qualified him for disability retirement.
Cited 0 timesPublishedYakama Nation Housing Authority v. United States
102 Fed. Cl. 478 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 5, 2011
Congress established the formula by which the appropriated funds would be distributed. 25 U.S.C. § 4152 (a). … The OIG conducted site visits and the audit report concluded that IHBG funds had not been properly allocated in previous years because they were based on housing units that do not qualify as FCAS.
Cited 6 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 10, 2018
Although DFAS has stated an intent to establish a debt against Mr. McCord, the government represents that it has not yet done so. … Sonenshine states that he has A member who has received . . . severance pay . . . and who later qualifies for retired or retainer pay under this title or title 14 shall
Cited 0 timesPublishedLoomacres, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 21, 2018
BASH programs clearly implement wildlife and land management even though they also relate to safety. … According to Plaintiff, “priority” means only that work should be awarded to a qualifying government agency if “all other things” are “relatively equal.” Pl.’s Resp. 5.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 28, 2018
The government and PAE also argue that RMGS lacks standing because it does not qualify as an “interested party,” and that, in any event, RMGS’s protest fails on the merits. … RMGS Has Not Established Its Standing A.
Cited 0 timesPublishedConsolidated Edison Co. v. United States
90 Fed. Cl. 228 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 21, 2009
LaRue clearly indicated that the plaintiff would bear burdens and benefits of ownership if the Retention Option is exercised: Q. All right. … Kelly, was qualified as an expert in “valuations, appraisals and appraisal reviews of utility properties.” Mr.
Reversed on other grounds by Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. & Subsidiaries v. United States, 703 F.3d 1367 (2013)Cited 20 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 21, 2022
May 27, 2020 initial evaluation briefing, see ECF No. 45-5 at 64, indicate that the solicitation was issued on November 12, 2019. 3 SDVOSB contract-holders would no longer qualify … Specifically, the agency noted that plaintiff failed to “clearly depict the [ ] . . . it used,” id. at 846, while offeror 57 showed one environment and at least parts of a second, see id. at 899.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 20, 2025
The Court previously noted that this comment did not clearly establish what role Mr. Kelly played in this operation. See Kelly I, 157 Fed. Cl. at 127 n.8. … Kelly was “qualified for service and separation.” Id. (capitalization omitted). Accordingly, the statement Mr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 11, 2025
Kennedy has failed to plead sufficient facts to establish the elements of either claim. … Cl. 301, 304 (1998) (holding that an account stated claim requires “a definite decision” in the taxpayer’s favor, a showing of which is undermined by “provisional and tentative” or “qualifying” language). Mr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedOasis International Waters, Inc. v. United States
110 Fed. Cl. 87 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 18, 2013
P00011 revamped the CLIN structure to clearly reflect a bottled water capability contract (service).” … Although the contours of government waiver are not as clearly established, the same logic has been applied to allow local government agents to waive the privilege if they have been delegated authority to bind the government
Cited 18 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 8, 2015
It is well established that such a procedural remand does not confer prevailing party status on an EAJA claimant. Id. … It is well established that plaintiff is not entitled to an award of attorneys’ fees under EAJA under such circumstances. Akers, 409 F.3d at 1358.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSkokomish Indian Tribe v. United States
115 Fed. Cl. 116 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 11, 2014
Both counts clearly arise out of the same operative facts, and both counts seek the same relief – money with interest, albeit under different theories (tax law versus a Fifth Amendment takings theory).” Id. at 1091. … violates the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701 as: arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity
Cited 5 timesPublishedAdams v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2024
In the present case, for petitioner to qualify for a Vaccine Injury Table presumption of causation, a preponderance of the evidence must establish that the initial symptom or manifestation of onset of her GBS occurred not … Lajara-Nanson’s opinion, referencing literature which “clearly demonstrate[es] the incorrect rationale” in Dr.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna