Case law

HARKINS v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 14, 2025

, reenlistment boards, counsel, pre-separation medical treatment, and separation pay). … Cl. at 255 (quoting Brown v. United States, 126 Fed.

Nicely v. United States

132 Fed. Cl. 649 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 16, 2017

RCFC 52.2; see also Santiago v. United States, 71 Fed. … Power & Light Co. v. Lorion, 470 U.S. 729, 744 (1985).

DSME Construction Co., Ltd.

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Mar 13, 2026

See Huffman Constr., 25-1 BCA ¶ 38,932 at 189,485-87; SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Apotex Corp., 439 F.3d 1312, 1320 (Fed. … Construction Co., Ltd., rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

McCormick v. Malherbe

116 F.2d 520 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 6, 1941

Hansgirg v. Kemmer, supra; Brand v. Thomas, 25 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 1053, 96 F. (2d) 301. One other question needs consideration here. … In this request is contained the following; Should the Board still feel on reconsideration that Hansgirg v.

98-18 992

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Jan 29, 2016

In June 2009, the Court issued an Order vacating that part of the November 2008 Board decision described above, and remanded the matter to the Board. … See AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 35 (1993); see also Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007).

Rockwood Chocolate Co., Inc. v. Hoffman Candy Company

372 F.2d 552 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 16, 1967

The board sustained the opposition and granted the petition to cancel. … (CA 2, 1956), 234 F.2d 538, 542 ; and Aluminum Fabricating Co. v. Season-All Window Corp. (CA 2, 1958), 259 F.2d 314, 316 . 4 . The Nestle Co. v. The Wilson Spice Co., 130 USPQ 175 , and Scholl Mfg. Co. v. W. E.

Prime Construction Co. v. United States

30 Cont. Cas. Fed. 70,111 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 2, 1982

The only question is whether plaintiffs original election to proceed via the board is binding so plaintiff cannot disavow it. Plaintiff relies heavily on our order in National Electric Coil v. … See e.g., Santa Fe Engineers, Inc. v. United States, 230 Ct.Cl. 512 , 677 F.2d 876 (1982); Tuttle/White Constructors, Inc. v. United States, 228 Ct.Cl. 354 , 656 F.2d 644 (1981). Gregory Lumber Co. v.

In re Lumber Liquidators Chinese-Manufactured Flooring Products Marketing, Sales Practices & Products Liability Litigation

109 F. Supp. 3d 1382 · United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · Jun 12, 2015

V. LUMBER LIQUIDATORS, INC., C.A. No. 2:15-01615 HURD, ET AL. V. LUMBER LIQUIDATORS, INC., C.A. No. 5:15-00424 Northern District of California BALERO, ET AL. V. LUMBER LIQUIDATORS, INC., C.A. … V. LUMBER LIQUIDATORS, INC., ET AL., C.A. No. 3:15-01012 EZOVSKI, ET AL. V. LUMBER LIQUIDATORS, INC., ET AL., C.A. No. 5:15-01074 Northern District of Florida CONSTATINE V. LUMBER LIQUIDATORS, INC., ET AL., C.A.

12-34 387

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Oct 31, 2016

After a careful review of the file, the Board finds that all necessary development has been accomplished, and therefore appellate review may proceed without prejudice to the Veteran. See Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet. … See 38 C.F.R. § 3.321 (b)(1) (2015); Bagwell v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 337, 338-39 (1996). The threshold factor is whether the disability picture presented in the record is adequately contemplated by the rating schedule.

Fannie Mae Clackum v. United States

296 F.2d 226 · United States Court of Claims · Jan 20, 1960

Harmon v. Brucker, 355 U.S. 579 , 78 S.Ct. 433 , 2 L.Ed.2d 503 . . . ... ,. . . After her discharge, the plaintiff an- , . , ,. -r, v. • i t> - ‘ pealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board. … The hearing was closed and the Discharge Review Board made the following “Findings After consideration of the evidence record> including the 201 file in the case, the Board finds: “a- That the discharge of the applicants

Haldane v. United States

1 Cl. Ct. 691 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 1, 1983

The only affidavit on record is plaintiff’s of January 22, 1981, which was submitted to the Board. Constraining the court’s review of the Board’s determination are standards that recently were restated in Parthemore v. … Finn v. United States, 212 Ct.Cl. 353 , 548 F.2d 340 ; Frye v. United States, 210 Ct.Cl. 325 (1976); Storey v.

Sharpe v. United States

134 Fed. Cl. 805 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 8, 2017

Auth. v. United States, 65 Fed. Cl. 534, 556 (2005) (citing New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742, 750-51 (2001)); see also Moreland Corp. v. United States, 76 Fed. Cl. 268, 294 (2007). … Wronke v. Marsh, 787 F.2d 1569 (Fed. Cir. 1986); Van Cleave v. United States, 70 Fed. CL 674, 678-79 (2006). Mr.

08-17 718

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Feb 27, 2015

Francisco v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 55 (1994). … Dinsay v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 79, 81 (1996).

Bryan Ashush JV

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Oct 1, 2025

Alliant Techsystems, Inc. v. United States, 178 F.3d 1260, 1271 (Fed. Cir. 1999); Inter- Continental Equip., Inc., ASBCA No. 44840, 94-2 BCA ¶ 26,655 at 132,609. … A contractor bears the burden of proving the Board’s jurisdiction to hear its appeal. Reynolds v. Army & Air Force Exch. Serv., 846 F.2d 746, 748 (Fed.

Bailey Specialized Buildings, Inc. v. The United States

404 F.2d 355 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 13, 1968

See Boswell v. United States, 123 F.2d 213 (5th Cir. 1941); and United States v. Stott et ux., 140 F.2d 941 (8th Cir. 1944).. … See Williams v. United States, 26 Ct.Cl. 132 (1891); Burton Coal Co. v. United States, 60 Ct.Cl. 294, 312 (1925), aff’d, 273 U.S. 337 , 47 S.Ct. 351 , 71 L.Ed. 670 (1927); Stone, Sand & Gravel Co. v.

Lakeshore Engineering Services, Inc.

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Aug 8, 2016

v{L_ TERRENCE S. … the Board's Charter.

Van Allen v. United States

66 Fed. Cl. 294 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 13, 2005

Goewey v. … But see Powers v.

99-13 421

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Oct 30, 2015

See Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426, 430 (1994) (where the law is dispositive, the claim must be denied due to a lack of legal merit); Dela Cruz v. Principi, 15 Vet. App. 143, 149 (2001); Mason v. Principi, 16 Vet. … See Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426, 430 (1994).

Lilley-Ames Company, Inc. v. United States

293 F.2d 630 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 19, 1961

Wunderlich Contracting Co. v. United States, 143 Ct.Cl. 876, 878 . We think that as a matter of law the Government-furnished material was not fully in accord with the specifications. … Christensen Construction Co. v. United States, 72 Ct.Cl. 500, 514 . See also Chain Belt Company, a Wisconsin Corporation v. United States, 115 F. Supp. 701 , 127 Ct.Cl. 38, 58 .

Haymaker Sports, Inc. v. Turian

581 F.2d 257 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Aug 3, 1978

We agree with the board that such changed circumstances preclude application of the doctrine of collateral estoppel. Accord, Old Grantian Co. v. … See Land O’Lakes Creameries, Inc. v.