Case law

Caves v. Secretary of Department of Health & Human Services

100 Fed. Cl. 119 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 24, 2011

of the Federal Rules of Evidence (FREs), which provides that: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified … See Munn, 970 F.2d at 873 (“Congress clearly determined that the Federal Rules of Evidence shall not be applied in vaccine-injury proceedings before a special master.”).

Faison v. United States

102 Fed. Cl. 637 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 4, 2012

“On May 6, 2010 Plaintiff was informed in a letter from the Department of Education that he no longer qualified for Total and Permanent Disability.” Id. ¶ 8. In April 2011 plaintiffs student loans were reinstated. … The Tucker Act provides the waiver of sovei’eign immunity necessary for a plaintiff to sue the United States for money damages, see United States v.

WOLF v. COMMISSIONER

43 T.C. 652 · United States Tax Court · Feb 17, 1965

The income thus qualifying as partnership dividend income is taxable to you to the extent of your distributive share thereof. … However, as clearly pointed out in Gregory v. Helvering, supra, what actually occurred is decisive, rather than the taxpayer’s motive.

Suwannee River Finance, Inc. v. United States

7 Cl. Ct. 556 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 26, 1985

This language clearly allows for the possibility that the Board might deny such participation in some cases. … Essential changes, once so qualified, are entitled to subsidy. No essential changes are in issue here. .

Oneal v. Commissioner

84 T.C. 1235 · United States Tax Court · Jun 4, 1985

That the note may in fact be paid at some later date is not sufficient to establish the existence of such a requirement. … Our holding and logic in Wing, Maddrix, and Vastola are squarely on point and clearly apply to the instant case.

Ravi v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 25, 2022

The plaintiff bears the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction, and must do so by a preponderance of the evidence. Id. … Cl. at 128 (citing cases), unless those agreements “clearly and unmistakably subject[] the government to monetary liability for any breach,” Aluminum Shapes, LLC v. United States, 139 Fed.

Crow v. Commissioner

79 T.C. 541 · United States Tax Court · Sep 27, 1982

However, it seems plain that the new provisions do not establish a wide open field for any kind of asset to qualify as a business asset merely because it may have some connection with a taxpayer’s trade or business. … And although the types of property explicitly identified in that narrow range of assets may not be exclusive, the business relationship must nevertheless be clearly established.

May Co. v. United States

12 Ct. Cust. 266 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 9, 1924

These decisions follow tbe general rule that laws are not to be given a retroactive effect unless they expressly so provide, and without discussing them, separately we think- it is sufficient to say that they establish the … Clearly, with respect to the class of merchandise now under consideration, that time was when entry for consumption 'was made and delivery permits issued. —Marriott v. Brune ( 9 How. 50 U. S. 619), Fabbri v.

Thomas Dieter v. Department of Veterans Affairs

2022 MSPB 32 · Merit Systems Protection Board · Sep 14, 2022

ecclesiastical endorsing organization, certifying that an individual is in good standing with that religious faith group, and stating that the individual is, in the opinion of the endorsing agent, qualified … Here, the appellant received written notice clearly stating that the agency proposed his removal on the basis of one charge of failure to maintain a condition of employment following the withdrawal of his

Daimler Chrysler Corporation v. Keith Maydak

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · Apr 4, 2008

This qualifies as a signature under the Rule. See also PPG Industries, Inc. v. … Clearly, the claim adjudicated in the court case under the ACPA is not the same claim as the one presented in this opposition proceeding, i.e., priority of use and likelihood of confusion.

Ritchey Flying Service, Inc. v. United States

145 F. Supp. 752 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 7, 1956

Any communication from or action by a claimant or his duly authorized representative which clearly indicates an intent to apply for benefits under this title may be considered an informal application thereunder if promptly … established.

Braun v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · May 25, 2018

James, Immunization as a Model for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, 29 Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism 140 (1999) [Pet. … He suggested that a dermatologist would be better qualified to view the rash and rule out alternative etiologies. Dr. Brawer has not responded to this point. Dr.

International Air Response, Inc. v. United States

80 Fed. Cl. 460 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 15, 2008

Trial established that plaintiff was a bona fide purchaser for value qualifying for the protection of 40 U.S.C. § 544 . … Although the appendices accompanying its EAJA application are listed chronologically and denote clearly which attorneys’ fees were incurred before April 7, 2003, they do not denote which expenses were incurred before that

Adirondack Sec. Corp. v. Commissioner

23 B.T.A. 61 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · May 6, 1931

Its capital stock consisted of 1,000 shares of no par value stock, which, except qualifying *1932 shares, were issued to and owned by its president, John Guibord. *62 In its income-tax return for the year 1925, the petitioner … The proof clearly shows, however, that the petitioner bought and sold securities solely for its own account.

King v. Comm'r

121 T.C. 245 · United States Tax Court · Sep 26, 2003

Section 151 provides exemption deductions for qualified dependents of a taxpayer in computing taxable income. … The Form 8332 itself clearly demonstrates that Mrs.

Walker v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 8, 2024

Respondent argued that (1) petitioner has not established that she received a covered vaccine in her left arm; (2) petitioner has not established a Table SIRVA both because she has prior neck and shoulder problems and because … Specifically, the flu vaccine at issue clearly would not have been ordered two weeks after it was administered. (Ex. 8, p. 1; see also supra note 4.)

United States v. Islip

18 F. Supp. 2d 1047 · United States Court of International Trade · Aug 26, 1998

Articles 10(b) and 10(c) have no special enumerated procedures for establishing proof of service. … It establishes the “time, place, and contents” of each of Defendant’s alleged misrepresentations.

Jenkins v. United States

102 Fed. Cl. 598 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Dec 20, 2011

Federal Circuit precedent clearly establishes that, in the Trails Act context, the federal government is responsible for the “foreseeable consequences” of its actions in issuing the NITU. … liability is established.

Central Soya Co., Inc. v. United States

761 F. Supp. 133 · United States Court of International Trade · Mar 20, 1991

The plaintiff submits that section 1313(j)(2) clearly does not require that the claimant have possession of the substituted merchandise at the time of exportation, as required by the Customs Service. … The legislative history reveals several views that were suggested and considered as to the requirements that would qualify a party for substitution same condition drawback.

Viereck v. United States

3 Cl. Ct. 745 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 3, 1983

The cash and other liquid assets transferred by VFI to plaintiff should just as clearly be regarded as part of the non-operating assets. … , particularly whereas here the evidence clearly shows, in substance and effect, that a § 368(a)(1)(D) reorganization did in fact occur.