Case law

William Taylor, Parent of Joseph Taylor, a Minor v. Secretary of Health & Human Services 0

108 Fed. Cl. 807 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 15, 2013

Griesemer stated “I don’t know that I have the experience to offer a very qualified answer about [the toxic effect of the vaccine on a child’s brain].” Tr. I 100. … Childhood immunizations are often administered within the medically established time frame for the onset of infantile spasms, and therefore, the hypothetical relationship between pertussis and the disease has been carefully

Lamson v. United States

101 Fed. Cl. 280 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 27, 2011

Supreme Court and Federal Circuit Precedent Clearly Establish That the Court of Federal Claims Does Not Have Jurisdiction to Entertain a Claim of Patent Infringement as a Fifth Amendment Taking Under the Tucker Act Plaintiffs … Plaintiff argues that passages in Florida Prepaid and Roche establish that patents are property under the Constitution.

Casa De Cambio Comdiv S.A. de C.V. v. United States

48 Fed. Cl. 137 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 27, 2000

See Bowman, 35 Fed.Cl. at 401 (“cases such as the instant one — where the Government exacts property which it later sells and for which it receives money — -must *146 necessarily qualify for consideration under the established … However, the standard employed in Breault to define state action is clearly broader than that employed by the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit in analyzing takings claims.

Myers v. United States

50 Fed. Cl. 674 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 31, 2001

Moreover, it is the plaintiffs burden to prove the existence of any qualifying exceptions, and he has not done so. Callahan v. United States, 49 Fed.Cl. 555, 558 (2001). Mr. … If the veteran has a qualifying disability, he is assigned a disability rating and compensation level based upon the reduction in his capacity to earn income from civil occupations. 38 U.S.C. § 1155 (1994).

Harris v. United States

4 Cl. Ct. 418 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 31, 1984

Despite the well established doctrine of strict construction of the sovereign’s waiver of immunity, plaintiff contends that a preliminary injunction can be granted as “an incident of and collateral to” his requested money … Moreover, the statutory language, which has been part of section 1491 since 1972, 2 clearly contemplates the entry of a money judgment in plaintiff’s favor before the Court can grant the corrective relief authorized.

Montana Bank of Circle, N.A. v. United States

7 Cl. Ct. 601 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 14, 1985

That it is necessary in qualifying for the loan from the First National Bank for building and operating expenses connected with the Fort Belknap Builders. 2. … was required to be construed under the strict standards appropriate to waivers of sovereign immunity.

Hawkins v. Commissioner

102 T.C. 61 · United States Tax Court · Jan 27, 1994

Qualified Domestic Relations ORDER Defined. — For purposes of this subsection and section 401(a)(13)— (1) In general.— (A) Qualified domestic relations order. — The term “qualified domestic relations order” means a domestic … Hawkins contends that this language satisfies section 414(p)(l)(A)(i) because the word “from” establishes Mrs. Hawkins’ right to a portion of the plan benefits. Dr.

Agee v. United States

72 Fed. Cl. 284 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 28, 2006

Therefore, Congress has not waived the Federal Government’s sovereign immunity with regard to ADA claims. See Gray v. … It is well established that this Court lacks authority to grant equitable relief except in limited circumstances. See Bowen v.

Martinez v. United States

26 Cl. Ct. 1471 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 28, 1992

. *1473 On March 27, 1986, Martinez filed a Request for Exception/Waiver stating that he was medically qualified for commissioning according to applicable regulations. On May 27, 1986, the U.S. … Martinez is clearly seeking equitable relief that this court has no power to grant. See Froudi v. United States, 22 Cl.Ct. 290, 294-97 (1991).

Weiszmann v. Commissioner

52 T.C. 1106 · United States Tax Court · Sep 30, 1969

The petitioners argue that obtaining a law degree does not alone qualify an individual to practice law in either Colorado or California and therefore does not qualify the petitioner for a new trade or business. … The expenses of such an education were clearly not incurred merely to maintain such a temporary, part-time position.

Obadele v. United States

52 Fed. Cl. 432 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 24, 2002

Those rules clearly define standards of eligibility. … Based on a review of your file, you have clearly indicated that you are not of Japanese ancestry ...

Franklin Life Insurance v. United States

37 F. Supp. 155 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 3, 1941

Still further it is said (p. 421): “When immunity is claimed from a tax laid on private persons, it must clearly appear that the burden upon the state function is actual and substantial, not conjectural.” … that it seeks to have established.

Commercial Casualty Insurance v. United States

71 Fed. Cl. 104 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 26, 2006

The court reasoned that sovereign immunity had been waived because the Tucker Act “waiv[es] sovereign immunity as to claims, not particular claimants.” 243 F.3d at 1373-74 . … for the Tucker Act’s waiver of sovereign immunity.

Simona Suguitan v. Robert A. McDonald

27 Vet. App. 114 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Oct 29, 2014

Section 1002(f) of the ARRA clearly establishes that FVECF payments are one-time payments, providing that "[t]he Secretary may not make more than one payment under this section for each eligible 3 Accrued … Congress is free to establish the scope of remedial legislation and has clearly done so with respect to the scope of survivors' entitlement to FVECF payments following the death of a qualifying person with eligible military

Borden v. United States

116 F. Supp. 873 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 1, 1953

Clearly under the decision in Standard Oil Co. v. Johnson, supra, he may not sue the Exchange Service, because consent has not been granted. May he sue the defendant? … They are not Government contracts and the distinction between exchange contracts and Government contracts will be observed and clearly indicated at all times.”

SAI Industries Corp. v. United States

60 Fed. Cl. 731 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 26, 2004

This evidence, according to SAI, establishes clearly and convincingly that the defects noted were due to design defects. … Further, we are not clearly convinced that SAI has even established that the government failed to consider the evidence SAI now supposes.

Western Shoshone National Council v. United States

73 Fed. Cl. 59 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 19, 2006

Shaw, 478 U.S. 310, 315 , 106 S.Ct. 2957 , 92 L.Ed.2d 250 (1986) (holding that the United States is immune from an award of interest absent an express waiver of immunity). … Because payment of the ICC judgment occurred after the omission of the ICCA from the U.S.Code, Dann clearly establishes that the ICCA’s finality provision may still act to bar claims against the Government.

Certified Blood Donor Services, Inc. v. United States

377 F. Supp. 964 · United States Customs Court · Apr 3, 1974

In summary, the record clearly establishes the following pertinent facts: the antisera were produced by injecting antigens in the form of certain proteins from human blood into the blood stream of rabbits, and if the requisite … Under the subject “IMMUNIZATION”, the following appears: Active immunity provides long-term protection; where immediate short-term protection is required, this may be provided by passive immunity, the transfer to the susceptible

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. United States

69 Fed. Cl. 784 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 25, 2006

,] and has clearly prejudiced the Government in completing fact discovery.” Id. at 11. B. … immunity provided by this subdivision.”). .

Jump v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 6, 2015

An abnormal immune response has been implicated.” … compromised immune system.