Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
1.29s
United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 1, 2013
The theory of thimerosal-induced harm to a vaccinee’s immune system was carefully considered and rejected in the OAP test cases. Id. at 1-2. … To establish vaccine causation, Petitioners must satisfy all prongs of the test established by the court in Althen v. Sec’y of Health & Human Servs., 418 F.3d 1274, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
Cited 0 timesPublished99 Fed. Cl. 634 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2011
Plati’s substantive claim must fall under I.R.C. § 7422(a), which contains the specific waiver of sovereign immunity for tax refunds. See Dumont, 345 Fed.Appx. at 592 . … Plati failed to submit the specific documentation required to establish financial disability. See Rev. Proc. 99-21.
Cited 5 timesPublished50 Fed. Cl. 375 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 18, 2001
Wages usually are income, but many items qualify as income and yet clearly are not wages. 9 The payments must be remuneration for services provided by the employee to his employer to be subject to FICA taxes. N. … Sun, the person who authorized the payment to plaintiff, clearly establishes, and requires a finding, that the 4.5 million dollar payment to her was, primarily, for severance pay in consideration for her past services rendered
Cited 2 timesPublishedMcCabe v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 19, 2018
McCabe’s diagnoses and medical care that she is not qualified to make and that are wrong. Id. First, Dr. Whitton states that, as a medically-qualified individual, he disagrees with Ms. … Mikovits states: “The clinical data clearly support our theory, and that is found in the report of Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublished63 Fed. Cl. 8 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 18, 2004
The Court of Federal Claims “has jurisdiction only where and to the extent that the government has waived its sovereign immunity, and any waiver of sovereign immunity cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed. … This court clearly has no jurisdiction over any due process claim that plaintiff may have raised. See, e.g., Murray v. United States, 817 F.2d 1580, 1582-83 (Fed.Cir.1987); Medina Constr., Ltd. v.
Cited 10 timesPublishedImaginarium, LLC v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 7, 2023
Additionally, the SVOG Program imposed physical and operational requirements to qualify for a grant. … The SVOG Program is clearly one such program that does not employ contracts.
Cited 0 timesPublishedSchilling v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 13, 2022
Since Petitioner was 62 years old at the time of reactivation, he clearly fell within this at-risk category. Opp. at 20. … Steinman’s opinion establishes the contrary.
Cited 0 timesPublishedContreras v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 10, 2015
Whitton about the immune system and how long the immune system requires to generate a response that could lead to transverse myelitis. In support of his opinion, Dr. … A methodology of relying upon the work from a set of extremely well-qualified experts is sound. Mr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedEstate of Braude v. United States
35 Fed. Cl. 99 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 7, 1996
Defendant then concedes that if plaintiff has established blacklisting under this definition, plaintiff has established an “equitable claim” on either of two alternative grounds. … Plaintiff has not established that a termination pursuant to P.L. 207 would itself be stigmatizing.
Cited 6 timesPublished102 Fed. Cl. 102 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 20, 2011
A waiver of immunity “cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed.” United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1, 4 , 89 S.Ct. 1501 , 23 L.Ed.2d 52 (1969). … The Court Lacks Jurisdiction Over Plaintiffs Frivolous Allegations The United States Supreme Court has stated that a court may dismiss a claim as factually frivolous “only if the facts alleged are ‘clearly baseless,’ a category
Cited 7 timesPublishedGraves v. Secretary of Dept. of Health & Human Services
101 Fed. Cl. 310 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 5, 2011
It is established that Prevnar vaccine can contribute to this type of injury. Prevnar is established as causing this type of injury and, in this case, it is also my belief that the vaccine did cause this injury. … This is clearly documented in Vezzani exhibit 28. There is no evidence of this phenomena in humans. (Resp’t’s Ex. T at 6, EOF No. 133-1; see also Resp’t’s Ex. O. ECF No. 108.)
Cited 8 timesPublishedD'Tiole v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
132 Fed. Cl. 421 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 28, 2017
To achieve an immune response from the body’s adaptive immune system, the viral strains contained in the vaccine replicate at a temperature consistent with that found in the nasal cavity, but not at the higher temperatures … G at 13 ("the attenuated vaccine virus replicates to induce protective immunity").
Cited 44 timesPublishedAureus Asset Managers, Ltd. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · May 26, 2015
In 1996, amendments to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1605A, lifted Libya’s sovereign immunity for its state sponsorship of terrorism. Id. ¶ 25. … Thus, the Court declines to give weight to these cases in determining what qualifies as property under the Takings Clause.
Cited 0 timesPublished95 Fed. Cl. 491 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 18, 2010
The Tucker Act establishes a waiver of sovereign immunity but does not itself create a substantive right to recover damages. Instead, a plaintiff must identify a money-mandating provision as the basis of his claim. … However the words of the statute are unambiguous and clearly do not give the authority to limit the waiver to consideration only purposes. It is either on or off.” Pl.’s Mot. 5-6.
Cited 0 timesPublishedKane County, Utah v. United States
127 Fed. Cl. 696 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 12, 2016
The amendments to the PILT Act in 2008 were clearly intended to achieve that result, but the later-enacted language of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 includes the “notwithstanding” language described above. … The discussion above establishes that normally, later expressions of Congress will control.
Cited 4 timesPublishedDepena v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 22, 2017
Romberg’s report nicely described the innate immune system. Tr. 117. Dr. Lokshin also acknowledged that the “Innate immune system clearly has a very big role in killing pneumococcus. That’s not in question.” … Prong 2: Logical Sequence of Cause and Effect Given that the DePenas have failed to establish prong 1, it follows that they have also failed to establish prong 2. See Caves v.
Cited 0 timesPublishedContreras v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
121 Fed. Cl. 230 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 6, 2015
They clearly had no expectation that the fact-finder would credit his testimony after his untruths had been revealed. … But as the special master clearly shows in Contreras V, Dr.
Vacated on other grounds by Contreras v. Secretary of Health & Human Services, 844 F.3d 1363 (2017)Cited 164 timesPublishedBoard Machine, Inc. v. United States
49 Fed. Cl. 325 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 9, 2001
plaintiffs and to the citizens of the United States that the more egregious acts, the ones that are completely unauthorized, cannot be compensated as takings, whereas less offensive government acts that are “merely illegal” qualify … If Congress has not clearly disapproved of an act (or clearly delineated the procedures for securing authority), then authority should be presumed if the actor is within its general scope.
Cited 3 timesPublishedEarth Resources Corp. v. United States
44 Fed. Cl. 274 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 12, 1999
Does the doctrine of assignor estoppel implicate the doctrine of sovereign immunity? The government begins its argument by noting that the government’s liability depends on the extent of sovereign immunity. … A contractual relationship, alone, is not enough to establish privity in the context of assignor estoppel.
Cited 6 timesPublished100 Fed. Cl. 584 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 21, 2011
Essentially, section 7422(a) functions as a waiver of the government’s sovereign immunity in tax refund suits. Chicago Milwaukee Corp. v. … When waiver legislation contains a statute of limitations, the limitations provision constitutes a condition on the waiver of sovereign immunity. Block v. North Dakota ex rel.
Cited 4 timesPublished
Ask Donna