Case law

Cherry v. United States

640 F.2d 1184 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 19, 1980

. § 1001) because it recognized that hardships occurred when missing servicemen had neglected to provide for their dependents via the allotment procedure established by the military. *316 H.R. Rep. … Also, the Air Force has established some regulations for the administration of missing servicemen’s pay accounts, and it may appear that these regulations have been violated in this case.

Colsa Corporation v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 24, 2022

Read together, plaintiff’s inquiry and the agency’s response clearly indicate that the agency understood plaintiff’s concerns, had investigated their import with the SBA, and decided not to change course. … “the opportunity to qualify either as an actual or a prospective bidder ends when the proposal period ends.”

Van Leeuwen v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · May 7, 2025

Cir. 1998) (“The effect of finding privity of contract between a party and the United States is to find a waiver of sovereign immunity.”). … As Mr. van Leeuwen was “clearly not [a] signator[y] . . . [he] could not therefore be in direct privity with the sovereign.” Anderson, 344 F.3d at 1351.

Pratt v. United States

87 Ct. Cl. 586 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 14, 1938

Code, Title 28, sec. 263) to establish suitable rules of procedure. … To do otherwise in the present case would clearly require expert analysis, comparison and explanation. See Paraffine Cos., Inc., v.

Asociacion Colombiana de Exportadores de Flores v. United States

19 Ct. Int'l Trade 490 · United States Court of International Trade · Apr 6, 1995

As indicated, Commerce established a benchmark rate based on the FFA rate, which was to be the minimum interest rate on all PROEXPO loans for flowers exported to the United States from Colombia. See 51 Fed. … Under § 355.25(a)(1), however, it must be shown that the government took clearly identifiable actions to abolish the countervailable benefits as to the merchandise at issue.

Hendrick v. Commissioner

35 T.C. 1223 · United States Tax Court · Mar 31, 1961

The testimony is clear that the director of the Hampshire Country School was a qualified psychologist, that there were other qualified psychologists and psychiatric social workers on the staff of the Hampshire Country School … , and that there was on the staff a qualified psychiatrist who visited the school once a week.

Calafati v. Comm'r

127 T.C. 219 · United States Tax Court · Dec 26, 2006

However, neither section 7521(a)(1) nor the legislative history of section 7521 “directly and clearly defines or otherwise describes the term ‘in-person interview’. ” Keene v. Commissioner, 121 T.C. at 14 . … hearing involved in this case, also qualified as an “in-person interview”.

Presidential Authority to Settle the Iranian Crisis

Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel · Sep 16, 1980

'W e perceive no reason to believe that passage o f the Foreign Sovereign Immunities A ct o f 1976, 28 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq., w as in any way intended to limit the established constitutional pow er of the President to settle … The treaty established a claims commission; Meade presented his claim to it with evidence of the Spanish settlement.

Glaxo Wellcome Inc. v. United States

126 F. Supp. 2d 581 · United States Court of International Trade · Dec 21, 2000

The Proclamation further stated that the Section A modifications, such as that establishing the new subheading 3004.90.90, “shall be effective with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, … In sum, since the Proclamation clearly does not specially provide for the rate of duty applicable to 1994 I.T. entries, by default the provisions of § 1315(a)(2) and 19 C.F.R.

MDB Communications, Inc. v. United States

53 Fed. Cl. 245 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 14, 2002

. § 1491 (2000), which waives sovereign immunity for claims “against the United States founded either upon the Constitution, or any Act of Congress or any regulation of an executive department, or upon any express or implied … The Comptroller General’s rulings do not stand for the proposition that every legislative grant of spending authority qualifies as an appropriation.

Griffin v. United States

96 Fed. Cl. 1 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 1, 2010

The court will transfer a ease when a plaintiff articulates a clearly stated and non-frivolous complaint. See Phang v. … In a motion for reconsideration, under RCFC 59(a), “manifest” is understood as “clearly apparent or obvious.” Ammex, Inc. v.

Justin Christopher Graves v. Department of Veterans Affairs

2016 MSPB 24 · Merit Systems Protection Board · Jun 17, 2016

. ¶4 The administrative judge ordered the appellant to establish that the Board had jurisdiction over the appeal. IAF, Tab 3. … The employee is only entitled to a hearing once jurisdiction is established, and that hearing is on the merits, not on jurisdiction. Id.; see Oscar v.

Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Commissioner

48 T.C. 118 · United States Tax Court · Apr 28, 1967

Constituting as it did a condition precedent to the very granting of such loan, the fee clearly constituted at least part of the consideration received by petitioner for the execution of the loan agreement. … In like manner, a policy originally issued for a 3-year period and subsequently renewed for an additional 3-year period will not qualify.

Carter-Wallace, Inc. v. The United States

449 F.2d 1374 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 15, 1971

“[I]t is desirable to make use of them [such presumptions] only when the harm that may result from error is clearly outweighed by the savings in social cost which the presumptions afford.” … Clearly, the agreements here in dispute relate in no way to the United States meprobamate patent, but rather deal only with foreign patents.

Scholl v. United States

61 Fed. Cl. 322 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 23, 2004

As a court of limited jurisdiction, this Court may only hear claims brought against the Government to the extent that Congress has waived sovereign immunity. See, e.g., United States v. … “Appeals processes [were] so lengthy and complicated that managers [in the civil service] often avoid[ed] taking disciplinary action” against employees even when clearly warranted.

Coed Records, Inc. v. Commissioner

47 T.C. 422 · United States Tax Court · Jan 23, 1967

sense that automobile dealers might not have referred their insurance business to the taxpayer unless it made such payments, the payments were not deductible since expenditures which violate Federal or State law do not qualify … The evidence clearly establishes that the petitioner did not advise such employers of the payments and obtain their consent thereto.

Newcombe v. Commissioner

54 T.C. 1298 · United States Tax Court · Jun 17, 1970

All the facts have been established by admissions in the pleadings and are found accordingly. … Some of the decided cases have emphasized the recreational character of the property as militating against the taxpayer’s position and there is some indication that buildings not being personally used may, without more, qualify

Whether Physician-Assisted Suicide Serves a "Legitimate Medical Purpose" Under DEA Regulations

Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel · Jun 27, 2001

The Existence of a State Law Permitting Physician-Assisted Suicide Does Not Immunize a Physician from the General Requirements of the CSA The CSA establishes … In the wake of the voter initiative, “medical cannabis dispensaries” were organized to meet the needs of qualified patients.

N-M-A

22 I. & N. Dec. 312 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1998

As a refugee, the appli- cant is within that “broad class” of persons who qualify as “refugees,” and, at a minimum, he may be granted asylum as a matter of discretion. INS v. … . § 208.13(b) (“The applicant may qualify as a refugee . . . because he or she has suffered past persecution . . . .” (emphasis added)).

Ewing v. Comm'r

122 T.C. 32 · United States Tax Court · Jan 28, 2004

Congress has used both “determine” and “redetermination” in establishing the jurisdiction of the Tax Court. … Thus, trial de novo is clearly authorized and appropriate.