Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.33s
50 Fed. Cl. 192 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 10, 2001
the established meaning of these terms.’” … Stopping a suspect fleeing at a dangerous speed through a city street is clearly a law enforcement activity.
Cited 9 timesPublishedBraun 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.
Cited 0 timesPublished34 Cust. Ct. 218 · United States Customs Court · Jun 9, 1955
(the real party in interest herein), which was established in 1948, and is engaged in buying, importing, and distributing catheters and other hospital and doctors’ supplies. … D. 46851, wherein it was stated that— It is a well-established rule that a “part” of an article is something necessary to the completion of that article.
Cited 3 timesPublishedBloch v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services
126 Fed. Cl. 460 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 30, 2016
In order to proceed with their case, they will be required to file an expert reporl of a qualified medical doctor supporting their claim. … Thus, the burden was on petitioners in this case to establish a plausible theory of causation with appropriate expert opinions.
Cited 2 timesPublished43 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.
Cited 7 timesPublishedPacific Gas & Electric Co. v. United States
70 Fed. Cl. 128 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 14, 2006
Similarly, after citing the same language, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania stated that “a broad assertion of harm is [therefore] clearly not enough. … In addition, the largely routine internal agency documents that the government is withholding are not “predeeisional” and “deliberative” in the narrow sense necessary to invoke this privilege, a fact clearly shown by many
Cited 22 timesPublishedVogel Fertilizer Co. v. United States
634 F.2d 497 · United States Court of Claims · Aug 13, 1980
Plaintiff, however, argues that the regulation is unreasonable and clearly inconsistent with the statute. … Defendant misunderstands the function of this doctrine, which, for example, would establish (in the absence of clarifying indentation) that the qualifying clause "taking into account the stock ownership of each such person
Cited 4 timesPublishedHayes Freight Lines, Inc. v. United States
163 Ct. Cl. 265 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 15, 1963
Similarly, in the present case, defendant’s representatives were “best qualified to describe the characteristics” of the jato. … The expert testimony and documentary exhibits in this case clearly establish that, from a scientific and engineering standpoint, jatos are rocket motors designed for specialized uses.
Cited 6 timesPublished68 T.C. 413 · United States Tax Court · Jun 22, 1977
Petitioners also contend that the specific provisions of the reorganization sections of the Code take precedence over the general provisions of section 483 under the well-established rule of statutory construction that "a … Fox is clearly distinguishable from the facts of the instant case.
Cited 23 timesPublishedNewtech Research Systems LLC v. United States
99 Fed. Cl. 193 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 16, 2011
Plaintiffs reliance upon Eaton Contract Services, Inc., therefore, is clearly misplaced. … A cost-reimbursement contract "providefs] for payment of allowable incurred costs" and "establish[es] an estimate of total cost for the purpose of obligating funds and establishing a ceiling that the contractor may not exceed
Cited 1 timesPublishedLegacy Classic Furniture, Inc. v. United States
867 F. Supp. 2d 1321 · United States Court of International Trade · Sep 19, 2012
The Court No. 10-00352 Page 8 record clearly indicates that seating is one of the main functions of the Heritage Court Bench. … Some exclusions are qualified and some are not.
Cited 4 timesPublishedSinclair v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 3, 2026
He stated that it was “well- established that GBS is triggered by an autoimmune response to an antecedent infection or other immune stimulant that provokes an immune reaction.” Id. at 6. The Chandrashekhar article Dr. … Further, Ho et al. states clearly, “The destruction of myelin involves anti-lipid autoantibodies, which can induce demyelination and prevent remyelination in mouse models of MS.” Id.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedHarding v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 6, 2020
Petitioner explained that because “[h]er GPA clearly started after the second Gardasil vaccine Petitioner received in 2010. … That should be enough to establish reasonable basis.
Cited 0 timesPublishedTravenol Laboratories, Inc. v. United States
813 F. Supp. 840 · United States Court of International Trade · Feb 3, 1993
Moreover, the court finds that the goods at bar clearly are for an electro-medical apparatus. … It is, therefore, necessary to establish a healing and curative purpose of a particular medical procedure in order to qualify it as therapeutic.
Cited 3 timesPublished102 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.
Cited 8 timesPublishedHodge v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 11, 2016
Hodge has established that equitable tolling is appropriate. … However, it is far from clear that for purposes of qualifying for equitable tolling, diligence in seeking medical attention qualifies as diligence in pursuing legal remedies.
Cited 0 timesPublishedTrue v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · May 7, 2025
He also 23 A recall response refers to a secondary immune response, which is “the immune response occurring on the second and subsequent exposures to an antigen; compared to a primary immune response, the lag period … “Although immune-mediated damage through molecular mimicry has been suggested, . . . this has not been established for any viral pathogen in postinfectious myelopathy.” Id. at 11.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedConocoPhillips v. United States
73 Fed. Cl. 46 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 12, 2006
The PMM, described by the Federal Circuit as a “market publication” compiling “the monthly average sales figures” reported by refiners, id. at 1341 , certainly qualifies as such a source. … Clearly, it knew or should have known that the EPA clause was suspect. Again, this conduct is far more egregious than that which occurred in either Beta Systems, Inc. or Chris Berg[,Inc.]. Id.
Cited 3 timesPublishedSacramento Municipal Utility District v. United States
44 Fed. Cl. 395 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 26, 1999
The unmistakability doctrine — a principle which dictates that immunity from future legislation (here, a tax) be clearly, unmistakably incorporated into a contract with the Government in order to be enforced — requires more … But legitimate expectations cannot include an expectation of immunity from legislation that imposes additional costs on activities from which the plaintiff derived a prior benefit.
Cited 4 timesPublishedCharles R. Coley v. Robert L. Wilkie
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Feb 5, 2020
party in litigation against the Government file an EAJA application within 30 days of judgment is not jurisdictional, it is an important litigation event crafted as part of the Government's decision to waive its sovereign immunity … Under 38 U.S.C. § 7264(a), this Court clearly has the authority to interpret its rules of practice and procedure.27 We conclude that the appellant's opposition to the Secretary's motion is unconvincing and that the Secretary's
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna