Case law

Chen v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 17, 2021

And recent infection or vaccinations (which mimic infectious processes) have been clearly shown to trigger the onset of some of these disorders. Id.; see also E. … As Petitioner and her expert established, an acceptable range of onset for immune-mediated CNS demyelinating reactions triggered by vaccination is within thirty days/three to four weeks following vaccination.

M.S.B. Ex Rel. Bast v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

117 Fed. Cl. 104 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 25, 2014

Doctors Raymond and Jones testified as expert witnesses for respondent, with the former found to be qualified as an expert in neurology and genetics and the latter found to be qualified as an expert in the field of oxidative … Doctor Raymond qualified this 22A variation on this argument was included in the post-hearing reply brief below.

Availability of Money Damages Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act

Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel · Oct 7, 1994

But such language does not clearly and unequivo­ cally reflect an intent to waive sovereign immunity for money damages. … R hodes, 416 U.S. 232 (1974) (state executive officers personally liable for dam­ ages under § 1983, subject to qualified immunity), a RFRA claimant also may re­ cover dam ages against an officer in his or her personal capacity

Daewoo Electronics Co., Ltd. v. United States

655 F. Supp. 508 · United States Court of International Trade · Feb 25, 1987

The rules prescribing the manner and method for filing a summons constitute terms and conditions upon which the United States waives its sovereign immunity. … Zenith does not dispute that Wilner was eligible and qualified at that time for admission to this Court’s bar. Moreover, several other members of Wilner’s law firm, Arnold & Porter, were then members of the CIT bar.

Summar v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services

24 Cl. Ct. 440 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 31, 1991

Thoman, pertaining to the onset of the encephalopathy within the three-day period after the third immunization. … Bodinsteiner [sic], a well-qualified pediatric neurologist, to be much more persuasive on this issue.”

Draper v. United States

62 Fed. Cl. 409 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 5, 2004

Because a security must also be a capital asset in order to qualify for a worthless security deduction under § 165(g), the IRS argued, the plaintiffs’ interest in a Ponzi scheme could not qualify for the deduction. … Dalm, 494 U.S. at 608-10 , 110 S.Ct. 1361 (1990) (“If any principle is central to our understanding of sovereign immunity, it is that the power to consent to ... suits is reserved to Congress [rather than the courts]”).

Santini v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

122 Fed. Cl. 102 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 30, 2015

The admitting doctor recorded that “[t]he etiology of seizures is suspicious for adverse side effect of immunization, despite receiving 2-month immunizations without complications. … Consequently, Petitioners have failed to establish the first prong of Althen[.]”

Yant v. United States

85 Fed. Cl. 264 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 12, 2009

The Tucker Act “confers jurisdiction upon the Court of Federal Claims over the specified categories of actions brought against the United States, and ... waives the Government’s sovereign immunity for those actions.” … The EPA was established to protect against pay discrimination based on gender. Rep. Goodell, the “principal exponent” of the bill establishing the EPA, County of Wash. v.

Staples v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human Services

30 Fed. Cl. 348 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 26, 1994

Additionally, section 13(a) requires the plaintiff to establish either of these two elements with a preponderance of the evidence. … The respondent finally argues that because the Vaccine Act is a waiver of sovereign immunity, any provision for compensation must be clearly and unambiguously expressed.

Mitchell v. United States

664 F.2d 265 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 21, 1981

The concept has been phrased in different ways, but the Supreme Court has firmly established that, for a suit against the United States, there must be a waiver of sovereign immunity shown by "clear congressional consent.” … These are not clearly included in the legislation plaintiffs invoke; the statutes concern property and its rightful proceeds.

Jackson v. United States

100 Fed. Cl. 34 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 22, 2011

In Flora II, the United States Supreme Court again clearly stated that 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (a)(1) requires “payment of the full tax before suit... ,” 3 Flora II, 362 U.S. at 150-51, 80 S.Ct. 630 ; see also Shore v. … Plaintiffs allege that “[w]hen Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast,” plaintiffs claim to have lived “well within the disaster zone,” thus qualifying for an extension.

Chaney v. United States

75 Fed. Cl. 206 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 2, 2007

on the waiver of sovereign immunity, are jurisdictional in nature.” … Whenever possible, the Court relies on the administrative record to establish the relevant facts.

Motion Systems Corp. v. Bush

342 F. Supp. 2d 1247 · United States Court of International Trade · Jun 3, 2004

Analogizing to the Supreme Court’s analysis of jurisdiction and waiver of sovereign immunity under the Tucker Act in United States v. … None establishes a rule of law under which this court, based on the effect of statutory words such as “clearly greater” or any words to similar effect, is to subject presidential findings to a substantial evidence test

Ridenour v. United States

3 Cl. Ct. 128 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 26, 1983

For example, Treas.Reg. 1.401-10(b)(4) provides: For the purpose of determining whether an employee within the meaning of section 401(c)(1) satisfies the requirements for eligibility under a qualified plan established by … In order for a plan to qualify for favorable tax treatment, an employer must establish it with the intent to maintain it permanently. Treas.Reg. 1.401-l(b)(2).

Giaimo

618 F.2d 125 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 14, 1979

In fact, none of the alleged facts even establish that INS was aware of plaintiffs expectations in that regard. … In order to qualify for this protection, the employees are required to follow certain procedures, including notification. Id. Plaintiff failed to *534 follow these procedures.

SEMERJIAN

11 I. & N. Dec. 751 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1966

(2) Since a mechanical engineer is a member of the professions within the meaning of sections 203(a) (3) and 101(a) (32) of the Act, as amended, a qualified mechanical engineer, who has established a bona fide intent … The phrase "for the purpose of performing," in section 212(a) (14), clearly indicates that an immigrant alien within the contemplation of section 212(a) (14) must •establish a bona fide intent to engage immediately

Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. United States

254 F. Supp. 3d 1333 · United States Court of International Trade · Aug 10, 2017

These facts establish Hartford’s consent to the act that would, allegedly, otherwise serve as the basis of the discharge. … For the foregoing reasons, Hartford has not established that Customs impaired its suretyship rights. Consol.

Niziol v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 7, 2020

Byers was unable to clearly state if this immunodeficiency disorder is synonymous to “immunosuppression” or if the term accurately describes S.N. … It is imperative to the integrity of the Vaccine Program that petitioners are able to obtain qualified experts.

ARTHUR

20 I. & N. Dec. 475 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2002

In order to qualify for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Act, an alien must apply for adjustment, establish that he is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent … No. 101-649, 104 Stat. 4978 ("1990 Act"), to exempt Qualifying aliens from the 2-year foreign residence requirement and the bar to adjustment of status imposed by the 1986 Amendments.

Insurance Exchange Surplus

37 Pa. D. & C. 63 · Pennsylvania Department of Justice · Jan 6, 1940

Article I, sec. 17, of the Constitution of Pennsylvania provides: “No ex post facto law, nor any law impairing the obligation of contracts, or making irrevocable any grant of special privileges or immunities, shall be passed … That is, an insurance policy is a contract between the insurer and the assured and the rights and liabilities thereunder are established for the term thereof.