Case law

Cass v. Commissioner

86 T.C. 1275 · United States Tax Court · Jun 23, 1986

This increased cost is clearly attributable to the exigencies of business. … Of this amount, the parties agree that $173 is allowable, as it was clearly for food consumed by petitioner while on the campus of Cal Tech.

Pukel v. United States

60 Cust. Ct. 672 · United States Customs Court · Jun 26, 1968

that the movements in question qualify as parts of music boxes under a criterion of either sole or chief use. … Clearly, “parts of toys” are not subject to the foregoing all-embracive language and hence their classification is subject to General Interpretative Rule 10(ij).

Indussa Corp. v. United States

40 Cust. Ct. 800 · United States Customs Court · May 1, 1958

by defendant is that, inasmuch as the articles of enameled cast iron cooking ware are shown by the price list forming part of the record before the court to be sold on a per unit basis depending upon size and coating, to establish … It is the opinion of the court that the Gavin case is clearly distinguishable from the facts in the present record.

United States v. Gardel Industries

33 C.C.P.A. 118 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 7, 1946

substantial type that would be used ordinarily as part of the machinery of a factory in the manufacture of the plaster of pans figures. *123 Furthermore, the witness Gardel, from his own statements, appears to be insufficiently qualified … The evidence submitted by appellee is not sufficient to clearly establish that at or immediately prior to the date of the importation of the molds they were not chiefly used in this country for the amusement of children.

Nippon Steel Corp. v. United States

223 F. Supp. 2d 1349 · United States Court of International Trade · Aug 9, 2002

The court also notes that the U.S. producers are largely long established integrated steel producers. … among qualified purchasers.

Aultman v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 19, 2025

Eudy’s credibility as her treating physician, arguing that he is uniquely qualified to opine on her clinical presentation and diagnosis. Id. at 3. … MacGinnitie established, the second immune system exposure after the initial, “training” exposure to the vaccination had not been in this case shown to exist or established. Second MacGinnitie Rep. at 1.

L.G. Lefler, Inc. v. United States

32 Cont. Cas. Fed. 73,039 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 30, 1984

Here, the original contract price, as established by plaintiff’s bid, clearly contemplates the use of foreign steel. To lower the contract price further would result in an unjustified windfall to the government. … Similarly, the remedy fashioned by the Comptroller General should be used only where it will clearly serve the purposes which precipitated it.

Kaetz v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 8, 2022

“The United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit save as it consents to be sued.” United States v. Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584, 586 (1941). The waiver of immunity “cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed.” … Cl. 1958) (“It is well established that the jurisdiction of this court extends only to claims against the United States, and obviously a controversy between private parties could not be entertained.”

Verckler v. United States

170 F. Supp. 802 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 4, 1959

was not a claim for taxes previously erroneously or illegally collected, but an election to receive the benefits of a relief statute. 2 *805 The result contended for by defendant would be harsh indeed because in order to qualify … That P.L. 417 was intended as a relief act is clearly borne out by S.Rep. No. 1402, 84th Cong., 2d Sess., U.S.Code Cong. & Adm.News 1956, p. 2244. 3 .

A & D Fire Protection, Inc. v. United States

72 Fed. Cl. 126 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 10, 2006

Such a stratagem attempts to evade the bar of task order bid protests clearly enunciated in Section 253j (d). But see Cmty. … In short, plaintiff bears the burden of showing that it was a qualified bidder. Id. at 1370-71.

Libas, Ltd. v. United States

283 F. Supp. 2d 1327 · United States Court of International Trade · Aug 13, 2003

The Supreme Court in Pierce held that “. . . the exception for ‘limited availability of qualified attorneys for the proceedings involved’ must refer to attorneys ‘qualified for the proceedings’ in some specialized sense … Since we have no information that establishes any of these employees as members of the bar, they do not fall within the parameters of the $75 minimum. Bonanza, 11 CIT at 444.

Bokum v. Commissioner

94 T.C. 126 · United States Tax Court · Feb 28, 1990

Claim of basis In analyzing whether Margaret qualifies for innocent spouse status on account of the claim-of-basis adjustment, we first consider the requirement in section 6013(e)(1)(B), that petitioners establish that their … The tax saved by the erroneous claim of basis (adjustment of $969,428 out of adjustments totaling $1,124,664) clearly exceeded $400,000 (out of a total deficiency of $513,755.37).

Binghamton Simulator Company

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Aug 21, 2014

The CDA is a waiver of sovereign immunity, and as such it must be strictly construed. Winter v. FloorPro, Inc., 570 F.3d 1367, 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2009). … In this case, Leidos has clearly and consistently represented that it does not sponsor BSC's appeal (SOF ~~ 9, 11).

William L. Schiffman v. The United States

319 F.2d 886 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 12, 1963

The findings of the Army Retiring Board, as approved by the Secretary of the Army, subsequently established entitlement to the disability retirement pay effective 15 June 1946. … Plaintiff says Caddington clearly implies that the court would have awarded judgment for disability pay based on the higher rank of a terminal leave promotion to colonel had this policy been in effect when Caddington was

Albert Mark Fonda

United States Tax Court · Jun 5, 2025

In petitioner’s words, this supposed rescission of contract “established my natural birthright and declared myself as the beneficiary, not the trustee for the STATE-created contracts or trusts established … Gross income likewise includes distributions from a qualified retirement plan. See §§ 61, 72(a)(1), 408(d)(1).

Military Leaves of Absence

12 Pa. D. & C.2d 413 · Pennsylvania Department of Justice · Sep 5, 1957

It is well established that a word or group of words may be given different interpretations in different statutes. … The board should establish a standard period, for example, one year.

M. B. I. Export & Import, Ltd. v. United States

39 Cust. Ct. 363 · United States Customs Court · Jul 16, 1957

Snow’s United States Sample Express Co., supra, “unless there is a clearly expressed congressional intent to the contrary. United States v. Pfaltz & Bauer (Inc.) et al., 16 Ct. Cust. Appls. 358 , T. … The narrow issue confronting this court is not whether a use provision should prevail over a descriptive provision, but whether a use provision qualified by a not specially provided for clause should prevail over a competing

O’CEALLEAGH

23 I. & N. Dec. 976 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2006

Ireland, was convicted in 1990 in Northern Ireland of aiding and abetting the murders of two British corporals in 1988, causing grievous bodily harm, and false imprisonment.1 The conviction, rendered by a court that had been established … The imposition of a cruel or unusual punishment, or of a punishment which is clearly disproportionate to the offense, as well as cases falling within the provisions of 22 CFR 40.21(a)(6), raise the question as

Boyd Bros. Transp. Co. v. United States

27 Fed. Cl. 502 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 30, 1992

Clearly, when evaluating intent, the IRS would not reasonably be expected to give any significant weight to such a self-serving document prepared after an audit has commenced. … While the IRS does not clearly articulate what act constitutes the required identification in Priv.Ltr.Rul. 85-31-006, the IRS does not indicate that a standard other than the "at the time of payment" standard articulated

LAM

18 I. & N. Dec. 15 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1981

for asylum under the Refugee Act of 1980 if he establishes that he is a "refugee'? … See also 8 C.F.R. 208.14 (effective June 1, 1980). 20  Interim Decision #2857 able that in another case, the evidence may clearly