Case law

Dupuch-Carron v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · May 28, 2019

In 2016, Congress expressly amended the Vaccine Act to recognize this principle: (11) Petitions for Compensation… (f) Maternal immunization. … Respondent contends that the recent maternal immunization amendment to the Vaccine Act establishes that a child in utero can “receive” a vaccine but it does not establish that the child in utero was “present” in the United

J.S. Stone, Inc. v. United States

297 F. Supp. 2d 1333 · United States Court of International Trade · Oct 31, 2003

Defendant argues that Plaintiff is precluded from challenging the results of the antidumping determination because, although it qualified as an interested party, it did not participate in the administrative proceedings. … Thus, Congress clearly envisioned “occasions when an aspect of an antidumping duty determination might fall within the court’s jurisdiction under section 1581(i).” Royal Business Machs., Inc. v.

Anderson v. Commissioner

67 T.C. 522 · United States Tax Court · Dec 22, 1976

Rui. 70-531 applied should we find said redemption qualified under section 302(a). … . & Y. exercised some of the qualified optiohs.

Therese Hahn v. Commissioner

110 T.C. No. 14 · United States Tax Court · Mar 4, 1998

Later Act Does Not Cover Whole Subject Moreover, it cannot be said that "the later act covers the whole subject of the earlier one and is clearly intended as a substitute". … Again, respondent's argument fails to establish either an irreconcilable conflict or that the later act covers the whole subject of the earlier one.

Richard P. Watson v. United States

113 Fed. Cl. 615 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 21, 2013

Cir. 2003) (en banc) (“It is well established that statutes of limitations for causes of action against the United States, being conditions on the waiver of sovereign immunity, are jurisdictional in nature.”). … Boessenecker was “clearly . . . perplexed by Mr. Watson’s condition”), plaintiff has established by clearly convincing evidence that Dr. Boessenecker, Dr. Schmidt and Dr. Hess diagnosed Mr.

Nitol v. United States

7 Cl. Ct. 405 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 14, 1985

Independent, qualified testing for radiation levels is necessary both to preserve plaintiffs’ property rights and to preserve their health. … Plaintiffs’ claim in cause of action III clearly grows out of and is dependent upon that treaty. Plaintiffs’ claims in cause of action III have no existence that is separate and apart from the Trusteeship Agreement.

Burlington Northern Inc. v. United States

676 F.2d 566 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 10, 1982

As previously mentioned, plaintiffs assets are virtually immune to physical decay; that is, they are largely unaffected by the mere passage of time. … Such evidence as presented herein is clearly unsatisfactory to establish that the Iowa curve selected to project an historical data base will produce a realistic forecast of the asset’s retirement pattern.

Wilson v. Derwinski

2 Vet. App. 16 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Dec 13, 1991

The November 1972 Report of Separation Examination did not mention any defects in the veteran’s condition and found him to be physically qualified to perform all duties. R. at 34-36. … is established ..., there is no requirement of evidentiary showing of continuity.” 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (b) (1991).

Estate of Williams v. Commissioner

62 T.C. 400 · United States Tax Court · Jun 25, 1974

Friedman Trust A whatsoever, unless they should happen to qualify as ‘heirs’ of the other deceased sister by reason of the death of the direct descendants of said sister.” … This clearly evidences an intent to have the income paid to the heirs or lineal descendants of a deceased sister while the trust was in existence.

Hoffman v. Commissioner

47 T.C. 218 · United States Tax Court · Nov 29, 1966

We hold that only one class of stock was outstanding during the taxable years, and that RMI was a fully qualified small business corporation under section 1371 (a). 3. … This tends to indicate a sale. (6) Paragraph 21 of the agreement clearly provides that Alfred Hoffman shall be in complete control of the affairs of Reba Martin, Inc., unless there is a default by him or the corporation.

Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. United States

816 F. Supp. 2d 1342 · United States Court of International Trade · Jan 26, 2012

The government agrees DSMC prevailed, see Def.’s Resp. at 21, but it argues DSMC’s petition fails to establish that DSMC was the party that authorized and incurred the legal fees in the underlying litigation or establish … Unification Church, 762 F.2d at 1079, 1083, 1091-92 (district court record clearly showed that only an EAJA-ineligible church association, and not any of the other three plaintiff members of that association, would have

Superwood Corp. v. United States

52 Cust. Ct. 92 · United States Customs Court · Apr 13, 1964

Without dwell *95 ing at length on the record at this point, it has been clearly established that the imported equipment was specially designed and manufactured for the sole purpose of making hardboard at the plant of the … Eindsland, an engineer, was well qualified in the field and testified primarily about the manufacture of fine paper, as opposed to hardboard.

American Can Co. v. Commissioner

37 T.C. 198 · United States Tax Court · Nov 16, 1961

And, finally, property may be held with a dual purpose; and if one of such purposes is to sell it to customers in the ordinary course of business the sales may fail to qualify for capital gains treatment under section U7( … They were sales in the regular course of the newly established business.

Cozart ex rel. Estate of C.A.C. v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

126 Fed. Cl. 488 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 25, 2016

Vaccine case; Motion for Review; Hepatitis-B vaccination; Standard of review; Al-then\ Failure to establish causation; Motion for Review denied. … Although there was recent immunization, a connection to the death could not be established.”

Smalls v. United States

87 Fed. Cl. 300 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 5, 2009

While the Tucker Act provides the waiver of sovereign immunity necessary to maintain a lawsuit against the United States, the plaintiff must also establish an independent substantive right to recover money damages from the … Clearly, as noted above, the Court of Federal Claims would not have jurisdiction over such a claim.

Long v. Commissioner

77 T.C. 1045 · United States Tax Court · Oct 29, 1981

Finally, regarding the extent of the joint venture, the agreement stated that— The parties hereto intend for this undertaking to be the creation and establishment of a Joint Venture, rather than the creation and establishment … of a Joint Venture, rather than the creation and establishment of a partnership.”

Hardy v. United States

127 Fed. Cl. 1 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 4, 2016

Rail Road r[an],” a qualification clearly indicating that the right-of-way was intended for rail use alone. Def.’s Ex. Y at 7. … Defendant’s arguments are contrary to established binding precedent.

Taylor v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 25, 2025

The medical records do not establish causation-in-fact. … assessment following MRI that did not include an immunization complication).

Forjoe

29 I. & N. Dec. 463 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Feb 26, 2026

Whether the respondent qualifies for a waiver under section 237(a)(1)(H) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H), is a legal issue that we review de novo. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(ii). … At the same time, the Immigration Judge did not clearly err in finding that the respondent entered into a fraudulent marriage with his ex-wife Emma and adjusted status as a result of that marriage.

Estate of Levin v. Commissioner

90 T.C. 723 · United States Tax Court · Apr 19, 1988

(a) “Continuous Service” shall mean Credited Service for benefit accrual under the qualified Pension Plan maintained by the Company. … The facts in this case are clearly distinguishable from those in DiMarco. In DiMarco, the decedent was not a controlling shareholder of IBM nor was he an officer or director thereof.