Case law

Martinez v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 4, 2023

Moy, there is nothing offered in this case “establishing how immune cells can get into the [central nervous system] in the absence of an actual ‘break’ in the blood-brain barrier.” Id. C. … The Chief Special Master’s opinion clearly indicates that he considered all of the testimony.

Antalosky v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 27, 2022

furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly … In attempting to establish entitlement to a Vaccine Program award of compensation for a non-Table claim, a petitioner must satisfy all three of the elements established by the Federal Circuit in Althen.

Oglebay Norton Co. v. United States

610 F.2d 715 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 14, 1979

To qualify for the investment tax credit, Oglebay Norton must establish that the reconstructed vessels constitute *759 section 38 property and specifically that "depreciation is allowable” on the reconstructed Ashland, Fitzgerald … The adoption of this position would help defeat the congressional goal of building 300 ships in the ensuing decade. 60 To hold for defendant would negate the clearly established congressional intent. 61 VIII.

Rechtzigel v. Commissioner

79 T.C. 132 · United States Tax Court · Jul 26, 1982

Because the burden of proving fraud is on the Commissioner, we held that he had not established fraud. 7 The affirmative proof requirement does not necessarily require that evidence actually be presented at trial to establish … Commissioner, supra, as being inapplicable to the particular facts of that case because the petitioner had clearly and unequivocally stated to the Court that he would not contest the fraud addition.

C. VALDEZ

25 I. & N. Dec. 824 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2012

Because we conclude that it does not qualify as an admission to the United States, the respondent’s appeal will be dismissed. I. … Currently, persons born in the CNMI are United States citizens at birth and are entitled to the same privileges and immunities as all United States citizens. See sections 303-304 of the Covenant.

Lamirage, Inc. v. United States

44 Fed. Cl. 192 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 17, 1999

The record before the court also clearly establishes that the Exhibit A inventory list included in the executed 1994 Purchase Agreement did not include a liquor license or a cabaret permit. … United States, 936 F.2d at 1270 . 2 The record clearly establishes that the 1994 Purchase Agreement, drafted and *202 signed by the plaintiffs, was clear on its face, and that the attached inventory list of property to be

Intergovernmental Immunity for the Department of Veterans Affairs and Its Employees When Providing Certain Abortion Services

Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel · Sep 21, 2022

Second, does federal law clearly and unambiguously authorize states to restrict VA and its employ- ees from providing the specified abortion services? We conclude that it does not. … Such exclusions are not compelled by statute, and “VA did not explain the rationale be- hind” them when VA introduced them as part of the establishment of the medical benefits package in 1999.

J-S

24 I. & N. Dec. 520 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2008

In order to qualify for protection from removal under the CAT, an applicant must establish that “it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16 … United States, 547 U.S. at 749, that legislation does not establish the proposition respondent and amici advance—namely, that Congress clearly intended section 601(a) to confer per se refugee status on any applicant who is

DAMIOLI

17 I. & N. Dec. 303 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1980

Clearly, then, the owner has elected to have the United States recognize her United States citizen- ship as predominant. … Here the affirmative actions of the owner herself establish the predominance of her United States citizenship.

Foskett & Bishop Co. v. Commissioner

16 T.C. 456 · United States Tax Court · Feb 27, 1951

Thus, not every event or circumstance which has an adverse effect on a taxpayer’s profits may serve to qualify that taxpayer for relief under subsection (b) (2). … First, the temporary and unusual character of the circumstance or event must be clearly established.

Gutbro Holding Co. v. Commissioner

47 B.T.A. 374 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Jul 22, 1942

Neither its continued existence nor any reason therefor is established. The record does not show that it was not dissolved. We think it was in fact liquidated. See Ward M. Canaday, Inc., 29 B. T. … In our opinion Congress thus clearly indicated that for Federal income tax purposes the present acquisition-?)!

Janowsky v. United States

36 Fed. Cl. 148 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 3, 1996

The Tucker Act’s waiver of immunity over implied government contract claims is limited. … These cases establish a general right to recover on a retention of benefits theory when a partially performed contract is rescinded for illegality.

Efco Tool Co. v. Commissioner

81 T.C. 976 · United States Tax Court · Dec 15, 1983

In August 1977, petitioner, a Michigan corporation, established both a profit-sharing plan and a retirement pension plan for the benefit of its employees. … The petition and its attachments clearly contain sufficient information from which to determine that four of the five limitations have been satisfied.

Kingsley Co. v. United States

6 Cust. Ct. 214 · United States Customs Court · Apr 9, 1941

direct interrogatories, and for the further reason that the evidence which it purports to present on behalf of the Government indicates that the chemist upon whose analysis the classification was based fails to show and clearly … merchandise analyzed was not in the condition when analyzed as it was when imported; that the merchandise had been transported across the country in a container which the chemist cannot recall as to whether or not it was immune

Tanross Supply Co., Inc. v. The United States

433 F.2d 1332 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 3, 1970

The proof Tanross offered to establish this point consisted of a sample of the imported kits and the testimony of Mr. Richard Lee Korte, service manager for Tasco Sales, Inc. … Accordingly, the question before us is whether the lower court’s decision was clearly contrary to the weight of all the evidence. We conclude that it was, and we therefore reverse as to this branch of the appeal. B.

Addison Miller, Inc. v. United States

70 F. Supp. 893 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 7, 1947

In another respect defendant was clearly to blame: Plaintiffs asked authorization to be permitted to employ 117 skilled and semi-skilled workers of their own choosing. … It is undoubtedly the rule, of course, as plaintiffs say, that uncertainty as to the amount of the damage does nor preclude recovery where the fact of damage is clearly established. Story Parchment Co. v.

Davis v. United States

108 Fed. Cl. 331 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 21, 2012

Plaintiff asserted at his discharge hearing that he contacted an attorney in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps to seek legal advice regarding his bar to reenlistment, but that by the time he was able to establish regular … Plaintiff alleges that the Army violated these provisions when it discharged him “within two years of qualifying for retirement.”

Overton v. United States

28 Fed. Cl. 812 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 23, 1993

No. 101-73, 103 Stat. 183, established the RTC as an instrumentality of the United States. 12 U.S.C. § 1441a(b)(l)(B) (Supp. I 1990). … In other words, the plaintiff has demonstrated no waiver of sovereign immunity. See United States v.

Julia R. & Estelle L. Foundation, Inc. v. Commissioner

70 T.C. 1 · United States Tax Court · Apr 5, 1978

In his deficiency notice, respondent allowed only $1,399 thereof on the ground that petitioner had not established that the disallowed portion had been paid or incurred for purposes permitted by section 4940(c)(3)(A). … deductions minus taxes imposed on the foundation under subtitle A and sec. 4940; (c) qualifying distributions equals administrative expenses plus other qualifying distributions.

Okerson v. Comm'r

123 T.C. 258 · United States Tax Court · Sep 9, 2004

That John Russell Okerson by his attorney, states that in the trial transcript of this Cause held before the Honorable Wyeth Chandler, the Court clearly stated more than one time that the Court intended all ordered alimony … The standard established by Congress for substitute payments is not, as petitioners would have it, whether a payor spouse actually makes a substitute payment.