Case law

Neubecker v. Commissioner

65 T.C. 577 · United States Tax Court · Dec 18, 1975

established. … The record, however, clearly disproves this premise in view of the fact that Neubecker did receive some property upon dissolution of the partnership.

Carbine v. Commissioner

83 T.C. 356 · United States Tax Court · Sep 18, 1984

The point is that the course he followed was in fact clearly and reasonably related to the "conservation” of his securities, notwithstanding that he might conceivably have attained that objective in some other manner. … A payment may qualify as "necessary” if it is "appropriate and helpful.” See Commissioner v. Heininger, 320 U.S. at 471 ; Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. at 113 .

Hartman v. Commissioner

65 T.C. 542 · United States Tax Court · Dec 15, 1975

Regs., fills in the gap and clearly provides that where a taxpayer files no return, the deficiency can be determined as if a return was made showing the amount of tax to be zero. … Petitioner’s request that we grant him immunity is without merit, since jurisdiction to take such action is vested exclusively in the United States District Courts, and then only upon application of a United States attorney

Retired Teachers Legal Defense Fund, Inc. v. Commissioner

78 T.C. 280 · United States Tax Court · Feb 24, 1982

In order to be exempt under section 501(c)(3), an organization must qualify under both the organizational and the operational tests. Sec. 1.501(c)(3)-l(a)(l), Income Tax Regs. … Therefore, an organization must establish that it is not operated for the benefit of private interests. Sec. 1.501(c)(3)—1(d)(1)(ii), Income Tax Regs.

Shelden v. United States

19 Cl. Ct. 247 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 12, 1990

Defendant cites 28 U.S.C. § 2680 (c) as being an exception to the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity. … CONCLUSION Clearly the district court had the power to enter the order of forfeiture at issue in this case, and to have it enforced.

Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District v. United States

49 Fed. Cl. 313 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 30, 2001

In the present case, the federal government enjoys no such contractual immunity from liability. … (A permit establishes a conditional priority of usage; a license, in contrast, is a confirmed appropria-tive right.)

Arbor Foods, Inc. v. United States

607 F. Supp. 1474 · United States Court of International Trade · Mar 13, 1985

Customs’ establishment of a “position” would be along the same lines as that of an “established and uniform practice” under 19 U.S.C. § 1315 (d) (1982). … Such goods are clearly prohibited from entry. Customs need not carry out useless formulations in such a case.

Ancman v. United States

77 Fed. Cl. 368 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 13, 2007

Nonetheless, the estimates were clearly identified as such and provided the address of the proper source to obtain official estimates. … The waiver of immunity “cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed.” United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1, 4 , 89 S.Ct. 1501 , 23 L.Ed.2d 52 (1969).

TIE Communications, Inc. v. United States

18 Ct. Int'l Trade 358 · United States Court of International Trade · May 5, 1994

The Court adds that section 1592(c)(5) provides for “forfeiture” to “protect the revenue” of the United States; a term identical to one qualifying term in section 1621, “forfeiture.” … Defendants’ claim that TIE’s second count should be dismissed because TIE has alleged a tort claim (i.e., fraud) which is specifically excluded from the torts to which the government has waived sovereign immunity under the

Estate of Bartell v. Comm'r

147 T.C. 140 · United States Tax Court · Aug 10, 2016

At some point not clearly disclosed in the record, but before March 2000, Bartell Drug approached Section 1031 Services about the possibility of employing an exchange in connection with the Lynnwood property. … This general rule for nonrecognition mandates that qualifying property be exchanged “solely” for other qualifying property.

Trimedyne, Inc. v. Myriadlase, Inc.

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Dec 10, 1997

These changes were not intended to alter the other ways in which priority can be established. … .* While the Medical Center * Although opposer no longer argues that the shipment to Kopchok should qualify as “use” on the basis of experimental testing, we would note that this single shipment of one prototype would clearly

Albemarle Corporation & Subsidiaries v. United States

118 Fed. Cl. 549 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 20, 2014

Likewise, plaintiff indicates that “[i]n the instant case, there is no dispute that the Belgian tax at issue qualifies as a creditable tax under section 901.” … Defendant submits that such a result is so bizarre that Congress clearly could not have intended it.”

Geo. M. Graves Co. v. United States

6 Cust. Ct. 344 · United States Customs Court · May 8, 1941

the paper industry in. this country and Canada; that he had been in every paper mill in the United States; and that he was a charter member of the Technical Association of the Paper and Pulp Industry, which has to do with establishing … Listening to discussions on the subject, reading the technical literature on the subject, and in consideration of the establishment of definitions. [[Image here]] Q.

Babbitt v. United States

16 Ct. Cl. 202 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 15, 1880

The qualifying age of the cadet differs from that of the enlisted soldier and indicates a different object. … So far as it holds cadets to be enlisted men it is clearly wrong. IY.

Litman v. United States

81 Fed. Cl. 315 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 20, 2008

Nonetheless, Hotels.com asserts that it qualifies for exculpation under I.R.C. § 6664(c)(1) because it acted with reasonable cause and good faith in computing its 2000 taxes. … Thus, the court concludes that Hotelsxom qualifies for the defense allowed by I.R.C. § 6664(c)(1). 4.

Coleman v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 3, 2014

Coleman's lack of income and absence of savings could qualify him for in forma pauperis status, his complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction in this court. … Moreover, on the merits, Mr. coleman's complaint is insufficient to establish a cause of action in this court. lt is well established that "'subject-matter jurisdiction, because it involves a court's power to hear a case

AG Route Seven Partnership v. United States

57 Fed. Cl. 521 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 29, 2003

Clearly, the government’s solicitation of Old Surety to potential acquirers can be *529 characterized as a request for offers. … In its capacity as regulator, the government had every right to assess the capital position of a prospective acquiring thrift in order for said thrift to minimally qualify as a viable acquirer.

L-3 Communications Integrated Systems L.P. v. United States

132 Fed. Cl. 325 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 31, 2017

Part of that qualifying proposal included a “Cost Volume/Proposal for C- 27J RAAF Training.” Id. at 3. … In its brief, L-3 does not clearly identify which of its written communications with the Air Force it relies upon to meet the “claim” requirement.

State of Mississippi v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 22, 2022

Good cause requires a specific demonstration that “disclosure will cause a clearly defined and serious injury.” Glenmede Trust Co. v. Thompson, 56 F.3d 476, 483 (3d Cir. 1995); see also Forest Prods. Nw., Inc. v. … If Plaintiffs cannot in good faith admit a request, they may deny it or qualify their answer. See id. (permitting parties to qualify or admit in part answers if good faith requires doing so).

Akal Security, Inc. v. United States

103 Fed. Cl. 310 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 29, 2011

Walden also points out that “the [CO] clearly examined the merits of each offerors’ proposals, as judged against the RFP evaluation criteria.” Int. Mot. at 36. … Indeed, the record clearly shows that Akal was credited for similar strengths in these areas.