Case law

Kiddie v. Commissioner

69 T.C. 1055 · United States Tax Court · Mar 30, 1978

Brown, M.D. (hereinafter Brown), a pathologist, in 1958; Carl J. Schneider, Jr. (hereinafter Schneider), an immuno-serologist, in 1966; and Ernest T. Mashiyama, M.D. (hereinafter Mashiyama), a pathologist, in 1971. … [Simpson v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 974, 984-985 (1975).]

Santa Fe Pac. Gold Co. v. Comm'r

132 T.C. 240 · United States Tax Court · Apr 27, 2009

Deductibility v. Capitalization . 261 A. INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner . 262 B. Victory Mkts., Inc. & Subs. v. Commissioner . 263 C. United States v. Federated Dept. Stores, Inc. 263 D. Staley I & II . 264 III. … United States v. Federated Dept. Stores, Inc. United States v. Federated Dept.

Conquistador Dorado Joint Venture

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Jul 2, 2024

While the Board did not rule in favor of the Navy on the Dead 8 claim, the Board concludes that for purposes of EAJA the Navy produced enough evidence for its position to be substantially justified. V. … Even more dissimilar is Oguachuba v.

S & E Contractors, Inc. v. The United States

433 F.2d 1373 · United States Court of Claims · Nov 30, 1970

Langenf elder, supra, and Acme Process Equipment Co. v. … If one of them tried to tell a Board what to do in a pending case, he would commit a reprehensible ex parte approach. Camero v. United States, 179 Ct.Cl. 520 , 375 F.2d 777 (1967).

United States v. Furuya

11 Ct. Cust. 551 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 11, 1923

It has been held by this court that where testimony is conflicting before the board it is the duty of this court to weigh it. —United States v. Riebe (1 Ct. Cust. Appls 19; T. D. 30776); United States v. … Oberle and United States v. Illfelder ( 1 Ct. Cust. Appls. 527 ; T. D. 31545).

Marshall v. Ledwinka

67 F.2d 495 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 4, 1933

McCabe v. Cramblet, 20 C.C.P.A. (Patents) 1220, 65 F. (2d) 459; Deibel v. Heise & Schumacher, 18 C.C.P.A. (Patents) 907, 46 F. (2d) 570 ; Brogden v. Slater, 17 C.C.P.A. (Patents) 1240, 40 F. (2d) 988. … Oldroyd v. Morgan, 19 C.C.P.A. (Patents) 1111, 57 F. (2d) 358; Andrews v. Nilson, 27 App.D.C. 451 ; Ryder v.

191018-42928

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Jul 14, 2021

. § 3.304 (f); see also Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128 (1997). … Hayes v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 60, 66 (1993); see also 38 U.S.C. § 1154(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f).

Yerxa v. United States

11 Cl. Ct. 110 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 14, 1986

See Brundage v. United States, 504 F.2d 1382 , 205 Ct.Cl. 502 (1974); Foster v. United States, 3 Cl.Ct. 440 (1983), aff'd, 733 F.2d 88 (Fed.Cir.1984); Pepper v. … Braddock v. United States, 9 Cl.Ct. 463 (1986); Yongue v. United States, 9 Cl.Ct. 635 (1986); and Cason v. United States, 471 F.2d 1225 , 200 Ct.Cl. 424 (1973). .

A-G-G

25 I. & N. Dec. 486 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2011

v. … The case was remanded to the Board for further consideration. 12 The Fifth Circuit, in Tesfamichael v.

Monningh v. United States

1 Cl. Ct. 427 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 25, 1983

v. … No. 535-79C (July 31,1981); Elizey v. United States, 219 Ct.Cl. at 590 .

Paxson Electric Co. v. United States

34 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,483 · United States Court of Claims · Apr 13, 1988

Co. v. United States, 135 Ct.Cl. 63, 69 , 140 F.Supp. 409, 412 (1956); La Strada Inn, Inc. v. United States, 12 Cl.Ct. 110, 112-13 (1987); Rockwell Int’l Corp. v. United States, 8 Cl.Ct. 662, 663 (1985). … La Strada Inn, 12 Cl.Ct. at 112-13 ; Kinetic Structures Corp. v. United States, 6 Cl.Ct. 387, 396 (1984); Space Age Eng’g, Inc. v. United States, 4 Cl.Ct. 739, 741 (1984).

Application of Strain

187 F.2d 737 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 6, 1951

We had occasion to study and apply that decision in the case of Manny v. … Kearby, 169 F.2d 808 , 36 C.C.P.A., Patents, 706; and Ware v.

Faircloth v. United States

186 Ct. Cl. 133 · United States Court of Claims · Dec 13, 1968

There have been instances where the Board has been held to have been arbitrary or capricious, but such a determination has been the result of Board refusal to correct a record, Grubin v. United States, 166 Ct. … Cl. 272 , 333 F. 2d 861 (1964); Powers v. United States, 176 Ct. Cl. 388 (1966), or the result of Board refusal to grant a hearing and correct the record, Hoppock v. United States, 176 Ct. Cl. 1147 (1966).

Application of John Bulina (Deceased) and Jack T. Brown

362 F.2d 555 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 23, 1966

In Graham v. … Clearly, the * * * advance which the Board would attribute to Oochardt et al, was not within the contemplation of the inventors. 4 . See text, supra. 5 . United States v.

David W. Piel, Deceased, by Tillie Margaret Piel v. Eugene H. Falkner

426 F.2d 412 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 28, 1970

See, e. g., Mims v. Central Mfrs. Mutual Ins. Co., 178 F.2d 56 (5th Cir. 1949); Struthers Scientific & Int’l Corp. v. General Foods Corp., 290 F.Supp. 122 (S.D.Tex.1968); Kilian v. … Cf., Land v.

Bogis

221 Ct. Cl. 833 · United States Court of Claims · Jul 20, 1979

The Correction Board denied relief and plaintiff sued in this court. Because important factual issues remain unresolved, we remand the case under Rule 149 to the Correction Board for a hearing. … It may have been based on views as to the law no longer tenable since Sanders v. United States, 219 Ct. Cl. 285 , 594 F. 2d 804 (1979).

Idaho Maryland Mines Corp. v. United States

104 F. Supp. 576 · United States Court of Claims · May 6, 1952

In the case of Mugler v. … In Thompson v.

Hardware Res., Inc. v. United States

2026 CIT 38 · United States Court of International Trade · Apr 21, 2026

Corp. v. United States, 159 F. Supp. 2d 714, 718 (CIT 2001) (citing Heveafil Sdn. Bhd. v. United States, 25 CIT 147, 149 (2001)), aff’d sub nom., Shandong Huarong Gen. Grp. Corp. v. United States, 60 F. … the length of the board.”

CRAMMOND

23 I. & N. Dec. 179 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2001

Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals (1) The Board of Immigration Appeals lacks jurisdiction over a motion to reopen where … V 1999). Before reaching the substantive arguments raised in the motion to reconsider, we address a preliminary jurisdictional issue raised in the Service’s motion.

Baughman v. Derwinski

1 Vet. App. 563 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Nov 13, 1991

Baughman, seeks reversal of an April 5, 1990, decision by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board or BVA) denying service connection for her late husband’s arteriosclerotic cardiovascular and peripheral vascular disease, as … See Oppenheimer v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 370, 372 (1991). See also Thompson v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 251 (1991). III.