Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
6,911 results
2.20s
United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 14, 2025
, reenlistment boards, counsel, pre-separation medical treatment, and separation pay). … Cl. at 255 (quoting Brown v. United States, 126 Fed.
Cited 0 timesPublished65 Fed. Cl. 625 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 18, 2005
The 104 members of the certified, opt-in class were colonels in the Air Force who had been selected for involuntary retirement by the Fiscal Year 1994B Colonel Selective Early Retirement Board (“Retirement Board” or “Board … Mayfield v.
Cited 18 timesPublished66 Fed. Cl. 294 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 13, 2005
Goewey v. … But see Powers v.
Cited 17 timesPublished36 Fed. Cl. 168 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 20, 1996
See Murphy v. United States, 993 F.2d 871, 873 (Fed.Cir.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 114 S.Ct. 1402 , 128 L.Ed.2d 75 (1994); Sargisson v. … See Doyle v. United States, 220 Ct.Cl. 285 , 599 F.2d 984 (1979) (en banc), cert. denied, 446 U.S. 982 , 100 S.Ct. 2961 , 64 L.Ed.2d 837 (1980).
Reversed by Roane v. United States, 237 F.3d 1352 (2001)Cited 4 timesPublished133 Fed. Cl. 306 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 16, 2017
Lewis v. United States, 458 F.3d 1372, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2006). As long as the board’s decision was reasonable and based upon substantial evidence, this Court will not disturb the result. Wronke v. … “Judicial review of a correction board should not be an opportunity for courts to substitute their judgment for that of the military board when reasonable minds could reach differing conclusions.” Banerjee v.
Cited 2 timesPublished59 Fed. Cl. 451 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 17, 2004
McMann v. … In suits under the Tucker Act and Military Pay Act, this Court’s authority to review correction board decisions is well established. Martinez v. United States, 333 F.3d 1295 (2003); Sanders, 594 F.2d at 811 ; Ewing v.
Cited 16 timesPublished106 Fed. Cl. 551 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 7, 2012
(quoting Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 198 , 82 S.Ct. 691 , 7 L.Ed.2d 663 (1962)); Voge v. … See United States v.
Reversed on other grounds by Cameron v. United States, 550 F. App'x 867 (2013)Cited 8 timesPublished57 Fed. Cl. 376 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2003
See Brown v. Sec’y of Army, 918 F.2d 214, 220 (D.C.Cir.1990); cert. denied sub nom. Brown v. Stone, 502 U.S. 810 , 112 S.Ct. 57 , 116 L.Ed.2d 33 (1991). … Brown v. Sec’y of Army, 918 F.2d at 219-20 .
Cited 16 timesPublished65 Fed. Cl. 826 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 16, 2005
In Haselrig v. … In Berkley v.
Cited 4 timesPublished99 Fed. Cl. 17 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 15, 2011
The Board’s decision that plaintiff is not entitled to disability retirement was appropriate according to applicable standards of review for the BCNR. Barnes v. … The Corrections Board had no obligation to adopt the Social Security Administration’s findings with regard to plaintiffs disability status. See Kidwell v.
Cited 2 timesPublished50 Fed. Cl. 300 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 29, 2001
Merits The central dispute in this case is whether Small v. … United States, 225 F.3d 1298 (Fed.Cir.2000) and Roane v.
Cited 4 timesPublished72 Fed. Cl. 580 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 31, 2006
III 1997))); Brown v. United States, 105 F.3d 621, 624 (Fed.Cir.1997) (“The Tucker Act does not provide independent jurisdiction over ... claims for [declaratory or injunctive] equitable relief.”); see also Johnson v. … Mot. for Recons, at 2-3 (citing Rice; Brown; and Betz v. United States, 40 Fed.Cl. 286 (1998)).
Cited 4 timesPublished29 Fed. Cl. 107 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 13, 1993
In Blevins v. … See also Mullen v.
Cited 10 timesPublished94 Fed. Cl. 375 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 20, 2010
Plaintiff must overcome the presumption of regularity that attaches to the actions of the correction board. See Richey v. … Defendant cites Wronke v. Marsh, 787 F.2d 1569, 1576 (Fed.Cir. 1986); Stewart v. United States, 197 Ct.Cl. 472, 484 (1972); Wyatt v. United States, 23 Cl.Ct. 314, 319 (1991); and Krzeminski v.
Cited 5 timesPublished89 Fed. Cl. 111 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 16, 2009
The CPEB or Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) is known as the informal evaluation board and the RPEB is known as the formal evaluation board. See SECNAVINST 1850.4B ¶¶ 701-703. The Federal Circuit in Gant v. … Martinez v.
Cited 24 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 22, 2019
In Silbaugh v. … .); Butts v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 532, 539 (1993) (The “selection of a DC is a question of the application of the law to the facts and not a question of law.”).
Cited 0 timesPublished50 Fed. Cl. 701 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 1, 2001
Small v. United States Defendant asserts that the procedures of the selection boards in this case are essentially the same as those endorsed by the Federal Circuit in Small v. … In Curtis v.
Cited 6 timesPublishedFirst Annapolis Bancorp, Inc. v. United States
89 Fed. Cl. 765 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 26, 2009
Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. … Bank, F.A. v.
Cited 4 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 4, 2025
See, e.g., Keltner v. United States, 148 Fed. Cl. 552, 564 (2020); Lancaster v. United States, No. 22-267, 2022 WL 3100430, at *2 (Fed. Cl. Aug. 4, 2022); Trace Sys. Inc. v. … correction board.”
Cited 0 timesPublishedOne Largo Metro, Llc v. United States
109 Fed. Cl. 39 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 21, 2013
Board. … Inc. v.
Cited 16 timesPublished
Ask Donna