Case law

Mackenzie-Kennedy v. United States

85 Ct. Cl. 405 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 1, 1937

The record we think establishes the fact that the Patent Office had knowledge and notice that the patent could not be granted except under the Nolan Act and that under judicial precedents long established this court must … This is not a case of a mere declared immunity of the Government from liability for its own torts.

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

Harmonizing the Professional Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 and Section 214 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1980

Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel · Feb 18, 2026

Qualified. … Alpine Ridge Grp., 508 U.S. 10, 18 (1993) (“[T]he use of such a ‘notwithstanding’ clause clearly signals the drafter’s inten- tion that the provisions of the ‘notwithstanding’ section override conflict- ing provisions of

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.

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.

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

M-F-W- & L-G

24 I. & N. Dec. 633 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2008

Dep’t of Justice, supra, at 308-13, and Matter of J-S-, supra, at 530,6 we disagree that removal of an IUD cannot qualify as resistance. … It is harm of this magnitude and permanency that Congress treated as automatically amounting to qualifying persecution.

HUANG (1ST VER)

16 I. & N. Dec. 358 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1977

whether he can show that he otherwise qualifies for the relief, there would be strong inducement for aliens to remain In this country in violation of law, in the hope of some day establishing by subsequently developed facts … In Matter of Ko, we found that the District Director had denied the application because of failure to establish investor status—that the alien was still unable to qualify as an investor at the time of filing with the immigration

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.

Furlong v. United States

153 Ct. Cl. 557 · United States Court of Claims · May 3, 1961

Plaintiff testified that who shot him on September 12, 1945, had never been definitely established. … Hyman David Shapiro, a qualified neurologist and psychiatrist; Dr. Joseph Bogers Young, a qualified surgeon, and Dr. John Thomas Lord, a qualified neurosurgeon, testified as expert witnesses for plaintiff. Dr.

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.

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.”

West v. United States

103 Fed. Cl. 55 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 23, 2012

Ordinarily, it is used when no other provision of this regulation applies, and early separation is clearly in the best interest of the Army. … Thus, a soldier separated under an honorable or general discharge is enti- *62 tied to veterans’ benefits if he otherwise qualifies for such benefits under the law.

AMORNVOOTISKUL

19 I. & N. Dec. 366 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1986

Prior to the 1981 Amend- ments the Service had established a policy, detailed in Operations Instructions 245.4(aX6), of holding such applications in abeyance until allocation of a visa was again possible. … that it had accepted this interpretation of section 19 be- cause it was giving deference to the Service's own interpretation, since "the promulgating agency's construction of its nwn regula- tions may be discounted only if clearly

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.

Nolan Bros., Partners ex rel. Nolan Bros., Inc. v. United States

98 Ct. Cl. 41 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 5, 1942

If these two rules had been established prior to the time the contract was executed, or if plaintiff had been given notice in advance of the execution of the contract that defendant proposed to establish such rules, an entirely … Certain of the items of damage and excess costs have been very definitely and clearly proven. Others are incapable of exact determination.

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.

Mason v. Principi

16 Vet. App. 129 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · May 24, 2002

The decision noted: "Qualifying service for entitlement to pension is not in evidence." R. at 144. An April 1997 RO decision noted that Mr. … Mason had never been formally denied non-service-connected (NSC) pension benefits, but that his record revealed no qualifying service. R. at 262.

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.

Jones v. Commissioner

51 T.C. 651 · United States Tax Court · Jan 27, 1969

We are satisfied that section 405 does not establish standards for determination of the existence of a qualified retirement bond purchase plan, independent of section 401. … That form does no more than establish certain details as of the date of that filing.