Case law

Cohen v. United States

105 Fed. Cl. 733 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 27, 2012

Zaidel’s willful posting of Plaintiffs works on the FEMA website clearly calls for increased statutory damages.”). In Leesona Corp. v. … Shinseki 589 F.3d 1201, 1215-16 (Fed.Cir.2009) (“The ‘re-enactment rule’ delineated in Lorillard does not establish congressional acquiescence in all situations.”) (citing Coke v.

TSR, Inc. v. Commissioner

96 T.C. 903 · United States Tax Court · Jun 25, 1991

Once the data for the game was collected and the basic game format was established, petitioner’s employees “play tested” the new game. … However, the same can be said for research in connection with the development of other products which clearly do not qualify for the section 44F credit. For instance, an author may conduct research on a novel.

Ottinger v. United States

106 F. Supp. 198 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 15, 1952

It needs no such *201 immunity in order to be able to go on governing wisely and as circumstances require without being hampered 'by its outstanding contracts. … Executive Order No. 9139 dated April 18, 1942, established the War Manpower Commission.

Sogitec, Inc. v. United States

31 Cont. Cas. Fed. 71,229 · United States Court of Claims · May 31, 1983

Where injunctive relief is sought, which relief is drastic in nature, the Court *535 must exercise great caution and even then, the aggrieved bidder should be made to establish its right to such drastic relief by means of … The Department of .Commerce bent over backwards to permit Sogitec to show it was technically qualified to submit an offer.

Banks v. Commissioner

17 T.C. 1386 · United States Tax Court · Feb 28, 1952

Other indication of an intent to establish an employer-employee relationship is found in the specification that the petitioner would be assigned to do research work on the project under the direction of Dr. … petitioner was a graduate student while doing research work under the appointments, i. e., while he was a member of the Institute’s research staff, he had training and skill and evidently received the appointment because he was qualified

R.K. Ex Rel. A.K. v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services

125 Fed. Cl. 57 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 12, 2016

Megson also was more qualified than Dr. … To find an abuse of discretion, the court must determine that the Special Master’s decision was “(1) . . . clearly unreasonable, arbitrary, or fanciful; (2) . . . based on an erroneous conclusion of the law; (3) . . . clearly

Sperry Flight Systems Division of Sperry Rand Corp. v. United States

548 F.2d 915 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 26, 1977

Further litigation on the price reasonableness issue, making use of the disclosed cost data, was thus clearly contemplated. … Clearly, the statutory language envisions no mandatory exemption from cost disclosure such as plaintiff claims.

Kentucky Bar Foundation, Inc., etc. v. Commissioner

78 T.C. 921 · United States Tax Court · Jun 9, 1982

Thus, the plan clearly serves a charitable purpose. See sec. 1.501(c)(3) — 1(d)(2), Income Tax Regs. … As set forth above, any private or nonexempt purpose resulting from these efforts clearly is insignificant and tenuous.

Bennett v. United States

4 Cl. Ct. 330 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 20, 1984

The decision to include the position of deputy marshal in the list of Department of Justice organizations eligible for AUO must be upheld, unless (1) it clearly contradicts the terms or purpose of the statute, or (2) it clearly … The head of an agency is required to establish work schedules.

Southern Shrimp Alliance v. United States

617 F. Supp. 2d 1334 · United States Court of International Trade · May 15, 2009

The reconsideration procedure established by 19 C.F.R. § 159.64(c)(3) does not appear to conform to the internal advice procedure established by 19 C.F.R. § 177.11. … See 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(B) (requiring the court to hold unlawful and set aside agency action “contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity”). G.

Central Savings Bank v. Commissioner

10 B.T.A. 1408 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Mar 15, 1928

They showed themselves well qualified to testify as to these matters and their testimony was not overcome by the respondent. … We think that the , building was clearly obsolescent in 1918 and became obsolete in 1925, and that allowances should be made for obsolescence in the years 1919, 1920, and 1921 on that basis. Reviewed by the Board.

Allstar Mayflower, LLC v. United States

93 Fed. Cl. 169 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 10, 2010

The affirmative language of the ICA, and Inter-Coastal, clearly establishes that the ICA is the sole statutory authority governing jurisdiction in this Court for all charges or payments of money owed under a transportation … Thus, the “bright-line rule” established in Inter-Coastal makes it clear that the ICA governs Plaintiffs’ claims for charges incurred under the IW05 and DW05 procurements.

W. L. Schautz Co. v. United States

567 F.2d 373 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 14, 1977

A winter vacation home is clearly a facility used in connection with an activity generally considered to constitute recreation, entertainment, or similar activity described under the terms of section 274(a)(1). Treas. … Since the loss involved in this case does not qualify as a deductible item, it cannot be offset against other capital gains.

CNG Transmission Management Veba v. United States

84 Fed. Cl. 327 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 21, 2008

The question presented is whether the statute clearly supports one position or the other, or is ambiguous on this issue. As both parties agree, the crucial statutory phrase is “result in.” … For the first time at oral argument, plaintiff suggested that § 1.512(a)-5T may be “clearly invalid.” Tr. at 34. This argument is untimely and waived. See supra note 2.

F. v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 7, 2022

Whitton stresses that the safety of alum has been well established over a 90-year period of use and that the innate immune response to an adjuvant is very short lived, terminating within hours to days. (Ex. J, p. 10.) … Shoenfeld has not established how that could be related to his theory of causation. An arthus reaction is mediated by antibodies of the adaptive immune response whereas Dr.

Estate of Harper v. Commissioner

93 T.C. 368 · United States Tax Court · Sep 21, 1989

However, as previously stated, the statutory provisions of both Ohio and Kentucky establish the validity of the inter vivos pour-over trust. … The phrase “property interests offered thereunder” in section 20.2056(e)-2(c), Estate Tax Regs., clearly refers to property interests devised or bequeathed to the surviving spouse by the will.

Sun Oil Co. v. United States

514 F.2d 1020 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 16, 1975

sought is clearly sufficient, on balance, to override a claim of privilege, the documents must be produced. … Since a President is not absolutely immune from court process, a former President can claim no greater immunity, and the court must determine whether his claim of privilege, assuming his right to assert it, is overcome by

Mohamad v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 10, 2022

Halsey was qualified to opine about the Secretary’s process because, in part, of his earlier work as a member of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (“ACIP”). … Services to appoint members to an advisory committee on immunization practices.

Nathaniel A. Carter & Stella C. Carter v. Commissioner

United States Tax Court · Feb 3, 2020

Section 170(h)(1) defines "qualified conservation contribution" to mean "a contribution--(A) of a qualified real property interest, (B) to a qualified organization, (C) exclusively for conservation purposes."5 The term … By contrast, Judge Dennis, in a separate opinion in BC Ranch, dissenting in part and concurring in part, clearly accepted our Belk analysis.

Nathaniel A. Carter & Stella C. Carter v. Commissioner

United States Tax Court · Feb 3, 2020

Section 170(h)(1) defines "qualified conservation contribution" to mean "a contribution--(A) of a qualified real property interest, (B) to a qualified organization, (C) exclusively for conservation purposes."5 The term … By contrast, Judge Dennis, in a separate opinion in BC Ranch, dissenting in part and concurring in part, clearly accepted our Belk analysis.