Case law

Batish v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 18, 2015

Adacel is an active booster immunization for the prevention of tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis. … However, the record clearly indicates that Petitioner was given every opportunity to make her case to the special master.

Osage Nation v. United States

57 Fed. Cl. 392 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 28, 2003

United States, 910 F.2d 815, 817 (Fed.Cir.1990)) (“The six-year statute of limitations acts as ‘an express limitation on the Tucker Act’s waiver of sovereign immunity.’ ”); Seldovia Native Ass’n v. … Id. 9 Therefore, assuming the Arthur Andersen Report qualifies as a reconciliation report, plaintiffs claims as to “losses or mismanagement of trust funds” accrued on December 31, 1999 and plaintiffs complaint was filed well

Maryland Deposit Ins. Fund Corp. v. Commissioner

88 T.C. 1050 · United States Tax Court · Apr 27, 1987

MSSIC was an insurance fund established by the State of Maryland in 1962 for the purpose of insuring savings account deposits with savings and loan associations doing business in Maryland that did not qualify for FSLIC insurance … Clearly, estimates are permissible in calculating IBNR insurance losses.

Bell v. Commissioner

85 T.C. 436 · United States Tax Court · Sep 5, 1985

The Charitable Contributions Issue The Universal Life Church, Inc., of Modesto, California (hereinafter ulc, INC.), issued a charter to petitioners in 1979 to establish a local congregation of that church. … Although not revealed by their income tax returns for the respective years, which were introduced in evidence, petitioners contend that their claimed contributions were made to ulc, INC., a qualified charitable donee, and

McKelvy v. United States

478 F.2d 1217 · United States Court of Claims · May 11, 1973

. § 1.1375-4 (fe) 7 sets forth the requirement that distributions, to qualify for the benefits of section 1375(d), must be made in money. … Since we have concluded that the constructive receipt doctrine is inapplicable, * * * the Roe decision is clearly distinguishable. * * * [ 430 F. 2d at 1172 .]

Seaboard Lumber Co. v. United States

19 Cl. Ct. 310 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 26, 1990

It is uncontested that the blowdown of timber qualified as “catastrophic damage” under contract Clause B2.133. … Clearly, the purposes for termination under Clauses B8.222 and C8.2 are different.

Hicks v. Commissioner

47 T.C. 71 · United States Tax Court · Oct 19, 1966

However, it is not sufficient to establish that Paragould was his “tax home” in 1961 for a section 162(a) (2) deduction. … Any expense incurred in complying with the draft board’s order was clearly personal.

Bateson v. United States

51 Fed. Cl. 557 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 28, 2002

Plaintiffs bear the burden of demonstrating, by cogent and clearly convincing evidence, that the Secretary’s decision to select other officers for promotion over them was the product of a material legal error or injustice … They claim that new evidence shows that the Secretary only approved the question of whether the board would use the “fully qualified” method or the “best qualified” method. (Pls.’ Cross-Mot. at 8.)

Goodman v. United States

2 Ct. Cust. 112 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 29, 1911

It is established, not only by the testimony but by the lexicographers, that the tail and wing feathers of a bird are appropriately described as quills. They are also described as feathers. … In other words, while quills had been held to include the wing and tail feathers of birds, it had also been held that they were appropriately described as feathers, and hence would ' *115 be clearly within the term “feathers

Thompson v. Commissioner

78 T.C. 558 · United States Tax Court · Apr 8, 1982

He further contends that the circumstances of petitioners are clearly covered by section 6013(b)(2)(C) and Dritz v. … To qualify as a return, the Form 1040 must "state specifically the amounts of gross income and the deductions and credits claimed.” Conforte v.

Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Commissioner

106 T.C. 445 · United States Tax Court · Jun 26, 1996

In order to qualify for deduction under section 162(a), five requirements must be satisfied. … Our review of the plan documents in question indicated that the reversion of any assets from the VEBA was clearly prohibited. Finally, in Moser v.

Yankee Atomic Electric Co. v. United States

40 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,808 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 22, 1995

Thus, “one who wishes to obtain a contractual right against the sovereign that is immune from the effect of future changes in law must make sure that the contract confers such a right in unmistakable terms.” … Clearly, then, the assessment is an add-on to the price previously paid to the Government.

Cooper v. United States

178 Ct. Cl. 277 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 20, 1967

Eeason: Established. * * * At present the patient is asymptomatic; his condition is good. … Commander O’Connell, on the qther hand, while agreeing that equally qualified doctors could disagree on the extent of the disability, limited the range wherein qualified doctors might reasonably differ in plaintiff’s case

Bickel v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 17, 2026

The record clearly establishes that in mid-May 2019, Petitioner sought treatment for some form of illness that began at the end of April. Ex. 13 at 24– 25. … And in so ruling before, I have considered expert testimony from qualified and experienced neurologists, and reviewed in detail the literature and studies offered on the topic.

United States v. Taylor

48 C.C.P.A. 97 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 6, 1961

It is impossible to reconcile their testimony to in any wise establish a definite meaning of “huaraches.” Kleinman’s qualifications as an expert on huaraches are the weakest of the lot. … Judge Ford: Unless he has personally visited these plants, unless he has personally seen this merchandise, how it’s made in various sections of Mexico, I doubt if he can qualify as a trade expert.

Lesher v. Commissioner

73 T.C. 340 · United States Tax Court · Nov 26, 1979

That fact is important in establishing that petitioners were selling neither their inventory nor property held “primarily for sale to customers in the ordinary course of his trade or business.” … storage of feed or equipment) which does not qualify it for the investment credit under this or other definitions of qualifying property.

Bullock v. Commissioner

26 T.C. 276 · United States Tax Court · May 18, 1956

The Velo-King debenture bonds do not qualify as “securities” within the meaning of section 112 (b) (3). … Neither party offered any opinion evidence by qualified experts in the appraisal of this type of security.

Schuster v. Commissioner

50 T.C. 98 · United States Tax Court · Apr 17, 1968

The entire business of the proprietorship, including its accounts receivable, was transferred to a corporation on October 31, 1961, in a nonrecognizable transaction which qualified under section 351, I.R..C. 1954, and we … A deduction for an addition to a bad debt reserve under these circumstances was clearly unreasonable, and the $7,432.04 addition to the reserve claimed by petitioners was properly disallowed as a deduction by the Commissioner

United States v. International Clearing House of New York

24 C.C.P.A. 117 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 17, 1936

Another witness, who was exceptionally well qualified, testifying for the plaintiff, was Mr. Weutiinger. … While there is no testimony to that effect in this record, the authorities we have examined on the subject clearly indicate that certain knitting machines are not capable of producing lace under any circumstances, while other

Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Commissioner

63 T.C. 790 · United States Tax Court · Mar 31, 1975

The new method is no doubt preferable to most taxpayers, because it defers income longer, but we cannot find that petitioner has established that the earlier method fails clearly to reflect income. … Petitioner argues in the alternative that because the reorganization qualified as tax free under sections 361 and 368(a)(1)(C), there can be no gain under regulations section 1.1502-19.