Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.48s
American Renovation & Construction Co. v. United States
65 Fed. Cl. 254 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 28, 2005
Intervenor-Applicant’s assertion that RCFC 24 provides an independent basis for jurisdiction, is clearly incorrect. … The substance of Intervenor-Applicant’s complaint clearly seeks to establish that it is the owner by assignment of the CK006 Contract, and that it was damaged by the government’s allegedly wrongful termination.
Cited 14 timesPublishedPhillips v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 30, 2020
Molecular mimicry is a well-established theory in the Vaccine Program and has been persuasively linked to immune-mediated conditions, to include ITP. Johnson v. Sec'y of Health & Hum. … Cir. 1992) (“temporal association is not sufficient…to establish causation in fact.”). It does not establish that Petitioner’s ITP was caused by either vaccine.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDixson Int'l Service Corp. v. Commissioner
94 T.C. 708 · United States Tax Court · May 17, 1990
International conceded that it did not qualify as a DISC during the tax, year ended September 30, 1977. … We have previously indicated that it is preferable for the Commissioner to clearly indicate that he is taking alternative positions and state that he has no intention to tax the same income or disallow the same deductions
Cited 36 timesPublishedPaula Constr. Co. v. Commissioner
58 T.C. 1055 · United States Tax Court · Sep 28, 1972
-Wooten, its accountant, all believed that PCC qualified as a subchapter S corporation. … Thus, the petitioner cannot,establish reasonable cause by arguing that it relied upon the advice of its accountant. , .
Cited 143 timesPublishedGeorge W. Kane, Inc. v. United States
38 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,385 · United States Court of Claims · Aug 12, 1992
Congressional consent to suit in the Claims Court, which waives the government’s traditional immunity, must be explicit and strictly construed. United States v. … A waiver of sovereign immunity cannot be implied, but must be unequivocally expressed. United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 399 , 96 S.Ct. at 953 ; United States v.
Cited 9 timesPublishedEstate of McCoy v. Commissioner
50 T.C. 562 · United States Tax Court · Jul 3, 1968
Petitioner argues that the amounts of the widow’s allowances are a proper deduction from the estate’s income since they clearly qualify as “any other amounts properly paid * * * or required to foe distributed” under section … The facts here clearly fall within regulation 1.661 (a)-2(e), and petitioner’s only possible chance to win is a frontal assault on the regulations.
Cited 6 timesPublished11 Vet. App. 369 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Aug 13, 1998
In January 1970, the RO determined that he did not qualify for SMC based on permanent loss of use of one or both legs. R. at 191. … The rating levels of SMC are established in 38 U.S.C. § 1114 and 38 C.F.R. § 3.350 (1997).
Cited 148 timesPublished19 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
Cited 1 timesPublishedRupert v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 25, 2014
The cause of GBS has not been definitively established. See Pet’r’s Ex. 1110 at 4. … Petitioner cannot establish entitlement to compensation based solely on his assertions.
Cited 0 timesPublished8 I. & N. Dec. 394 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1959
A nonimmigrant student who represented in his visa application that he had sufficient funds to finance his education in the United States when in fact he had only his passage money was clearly not qualified for student … Since respondent was not in possession of cash, neither in the hand nor in the bank, sufficient to cover his expenses while in this country and other arrangements not having been made, he was clearly un- qualified for
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Shoe Corp. v. United States
907 F. Supp. 408 · United States Court of International Trade · Oct 25, 1995
Although the federal government enjoys broad immunity, this immunity does not extend to unconstitutional behavior, and a statute of limitations that operates in violation of the Due Process Clause constitutes an invalid exercise … Ill, § 1 of the Constitution or the sovereign immunity of the federal government....
Cited 30 timesPublishedHolt v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 16, 2015
Wiznitzer to be the most qualified and reliable witness. … Clearly, Dr.
Cited 0 timesPublishedCommon Ground Healthcare Cooperative v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 15, 2019
In conjunction with these reforms, the Act provided for the establishment of an American Health Benefit Exchange (“exchange”) in each state by January 1, 2014, to facilitate the purchase of “qualified health plans” by individuals … Indeed, the court very clearly emphasized that the premium tax credit program and the cost-sharing reduction program were separate and distinct. See California, 267 F. Supp. 3d at 1131.
Cited 0 timesPublished55 Fed. Cl. 157 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 10, 2003
Regardless, plaintiff eventually was informed that she qualified for no benefits under the SBP. … Plaintiff attempts to establish her lack of knowledge in several ways.
Cited 0 timesPublished85 T.C. 663 · United States Tax Court · Oct 30, 1985
Although petitioner argues otherwise, a review of the facts herein clearly establishes that the option was granted by Spencer Foods in connection with petitioner’s performance of services. … Petitioner concedes that the option was not actively traded on an established market.
Cited 27 timesPublishedCommunity Health Choice, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 15, 2019
In conjunction with these reforms, the Act provided for the establishment of an American Health Benefit Exchange (“exchange”) in each state by January 1, 2014, to facilitate the purchase of “qualified health plans” by individuals … The Tucker Act, the principal statute governing the jurisdiction of this court, waives sovereign immunity for claims against the United States, not sounding in tort, that are founded upon the United States Constitution, a
Cited 0 timesPublishedJacob Sincoff, Inc. v. Commissioner
20 T.C. 288 · United States Tax Court · Apr 30, 1953
The evidence as a whole clearly indicates that no expansion in the business was contemplated at the close of 1945. … The record is somewhat vague as to just what amounts the petitioner is contending qualify as indebtedness under section 719 (a) (1).
Cited 10 timesPublishedAmerican Lifestyle Homes, Inc. v. United States
17 Cl. Ct. 711 · United States Court of Claims · Aug 8, 1989
Hence, any and all damages which plaintiff may have incurred were the result of EPA actions taken in accordance with the procedures established under CERCLA. … The United States has waived its immunity as to claims arising under CERCLA only to the extent that such actions are maintained in the district court.
Cited 12 timesPublished103 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.
Cited 6 timesPublished547 F.2d 548 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 15, 1976
qualified for the option *261 to expense such, costs. … Reliance on these cases for such a well-established rule of tax law illustrates the poverty of defendant’s argument and reveals to what extent it would mutilate the specific exception to the general rule as spelled out in
Cited 12 timesPublished
Ask Donna