Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,740 results
1.64s
70 Fed. Cl. 479 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 28, 2006
To be eligible for retired pay for non-regular service, a member must complete a *482 minimum of 20 years of qualifying service and serve the last eight years of qualifying service ... as a member of a Reserve component. … Having been advised by the ABCMR that only a special act of Congress could establish his eligibility to receive retired pay, plaintiff wrote Senator Barbara Boxer in March 2000.
Cited 5 timesPublishedKelley v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
68 Fed. Cl. 84 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 31, 2005
Tomatore’s credentials, see, e.g., id. at *7 & n. 14 (observing that petitioner’s expert, a board-certified neurologist and Georgetown University Medical Center professor, “is clearly well qualified”); id. at *14 n. 26 (noting … While he is clearly well qualified, his testimony strayed from accepted medical princip[le]s into speculative, argumentative, and unsupported statements. The undersigned suspects that Dr.
Cited 57 timesPublished93 Fed. Cl. 411 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 16, 2010
The United States Supreme Court has found that “a court may dismiss a claim as factually frivolous only if the facts alleged are ‘clearly baseless’... a category encompassing allegations that are ‘fanciful’ ... … claims against the sovereign, limited only by the legislative decision to waive sovereign immunity as to the types of claims allowed.
Cited 12 timesPublishedHAZLEHURST v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 16, 2025
It claimed that the vaccines damaged Michelle’s immune system, and “due to her immune deficiency, she was unable to clear from her body the measles virus contained in the MMR vaccine.” Cedillo, 617 F.3d at 1335. … Kinsbourne testified that an immune response triggered by the measles component of the MMR vaccine could lead to an increase of pro-inflammatory immune cells in the brain. Id. at *65–67.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRadioshack Corp. v. United States
105 Fed. Cl. 617 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 29, 2012
has previously filed a qualifying administrative refund claim” with the IRS). … However, a class representative’s filing of a class action complaint in federal court clearly does not satisfy the jurisdictional administrative exhaustion requirements for all putative class members.
Cited 1 timesPublished77 Fed. Cl. 106 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 7, 2007
Congressional consent to suit in the Court of Federal Claims, which thereby waives sovereign immunity, must be explicit and strictly construed. United States v. … The BBG is an independent establishment within the executive branch. 22 U.S.C. § 6203 (2000), 5 U.S.C. § 104 (2000).
Cited 2 timesPublished48 Fed. Cl. 602 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 13, 2001
Furthermore, although generally a movant must show new evidence, supervening law, or a clearly erroneous decision in order to obtain reconsideration, this is not a limit on the court’s ability to review its own decisions. … Individuals who qualify for AUO hours are not paid on an hourly basis for their overtime hours, but receive a percentage of their basic pay rate as compensation. Id.
Cited 12 timesPublishedPerez v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 29, 2015
To establish entitlement to compensation under the Program, Petitioner is required to establish each of the three prongs of Althen by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. … This was clearly Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedInsurance Co. of the West v. United States
100 Fed. Cl. 58 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 8, 2011
In essence, these Acts withdraw the Tucker Act’s waiver of sovereign immunity. See Ins. Co. of the W., 243 F.3d at 1375 . … On the other hand, the general rule in law is that when something must be clearly shown then mere inference will not suffice.
Cited 10 timesPublished123 Fed. Cl. 633 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 22, 2015
S.D.N.Y. 2004), and remanding for the bankruptcy court to appoint a qualified independent examiner). 4 See generally In re Loral Space & Commc'ns, Ltd., 342 B.R. 132 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (dismissing LSPC's appeal of the Bankruptcy … Ivaldy's claims based on the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause and Article IV's Privileges and Immunities Clause, and Mr.
Cited 4 timesPublishedMatthew Walter Stephan v. United States
111 Fed. Cl. 676 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 17, 2013
sovereign immunity, nor need they be construed in the manner appropriate to waivers of sovereign immunity.” … Instead, it emphasizes that an employee must meet the criteria contained in the DSSR (and any that may be added by the DoD) before qualifying for an LQA.
Cited 1 timesPublishedAgnew v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 21, 2016
The Vaccine Act established a federal “compensation program” under which awards are to be “made to vaccine-injured persons quickly, easily, and with certainty and generosity.” … McGeady qualified his answer by stating he did not accept Dr. Bellanti’s theory of causation. Dr. McGeady’s caveat does not vitiate his admission that, were he to accept Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedManor Care, Inc. v. United States
89 Fed. Cl. 618 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 27, 2009
Clearly, in these cases, the credit was not serving as *626 an incentive for the hiring of target group members. … The plaintiff was permitted proceed to trial and attempt to establish how many, if any, employees would have been certified had their requests been reviewed.
Cited 7 timesPublishedHue Thi Nguyen v. United States
56 Fed. Cl. 550 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 1, 2003
Even if Plaintiffs Qualified Under the Tolling Provisions of § 2501, Their Complaint is Still Untimely. … The Court in Goewey noted that “hardship” and “inconvenience” did not qualify as grounds for tolling the statute. Id. at 544 .
Cited 1 timesPublishedDelozier v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 19, 2021
While it may have been established in this case that the HBV vaccine could trigger one instance of AA, it has not been similarly shown that any trigger (vaccine or not) would so alter a person’s immune … An abuse of discretion occurs when a special master’s decision is: “(1) … clearly unreasonable, arbitrary, or fanciful; (2) … based on an erroneous conclusion of the law; (3) … clearly erroneous; or (4) the record contains
Cited 0 timesPublishedLOYD v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
United States Court of Federal Claims · May 27, 2026
The record clearly established the CBC panel ordered at Ms. Loyd’s request revealed a normal platelet level of 340,000. Dr. … He clearly did not miss the import of that testimony and it was taken into consideration. We note, once again, the injury involved there was not ITP.
Cited 0 timesPublishedKoehn v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 19, 2013
McCabe is qualified to testify about causation even though he would not be qualified to testify about treatment. Petitioner also opines that, while Dr. … McCabe was uniquely qualified to testify about the causal connection between Gardasil and SJIA based on his research as an immunologist, Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDay v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 7, 2015
He testified, “Clearly, there are genes that are predisposing her family to autoimmunity, [so] that their immune system is more likely to attack self-antigens” than someone else’s immune system. Tr. 130. … Leist, one of the Group’s individual participants worked in the CDC’s immunization office, and each of the Group’s members is a well-qualified pediatric and public health specialist.
Cited 0 timesPublished49 Fed. Cl. 673 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 29, 2001
The limited jurisdiction of this Court serves as a waiver of the sovereign immunity that the United States government otherwise enjoys. 28 U.S.C. § 1491 (2001). … Thus, his service does not qualify for the tolling provisions of the SSCRA.
Cited 39 timesPublishedLiberty Mutual Insurance v. United States
70 Fed. Cl. 37 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 27, 2006
Although the Tucker Act waives sovereign immunity and establishes jurisdiction in this court, courts have recognized that the Act does not by itself create substantive rights. See Folden, 379 F.3d at 1354 . … The Supreme Court in Blue Fox stated clearly that none of those eases “involved a question of sovereign immunity.”
Cited 13 timesPublished
Ask Donna