Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.56s
42 Fed. Cl. 41 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 9, 1998
Their land was located in a nationally significant area then, and whoever else the Act was intended to reach, clearly it applied to these plaintiffs. … The words “prescribed therein” in reference to the 1960 Act presumes that an individual who qualified for compensation would review its contents.
Reversed by Caroline E. Strickland, and Arthur Charlton and Joyce Healy v. United States, 199 F.3d 1310 (1999)Cited 2 timesPublishedGrigsby v. Department of Energy
585 F.2d 1069 · Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals · May 2, 1978
The official status of the Robert Leger Well No. 1 production from October 14, 1974, until June 24, 1976, is not clearly established by the record or the briefs before us. … Order No. 464-F-l, issued on February 20, 1969, established two units in place of the one unit established by Order No. 464: the Heywood RA SU A and the Heywood RA SU B.
Cited 30 timesPublishedPeggy L. Quattlebaum v. Eric K. Shinseki
25 Vet. App. 171 · United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims · Jan 5, 2012
Mancari, 417 U.S. 535, 551 (1974) ("[W]hen two statutes are capable of co-existence, it is the duty of the courts, absent a clearly expressed congressional intention to the contrary, to regard each as effective."); Terry … Quattlebaum established her status as a proper accrued benefits claimant.
Cited 0 timesPublishedVazquez v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 21, 2025
The article states that billing code 90471 refers to immunization administration, “one vaccine (single or combination vaccine/toxoid).” … Therefore, the records show “there are clearly charges for two vaccines, influenza and pneumococcal given at Dr. Lima’s office on 12/6/2014 with charges showing these vaccinations in both Exs. 27 and 29.”
Cited 0 timesUnpublished94 T.C. 595 · United States Tax Court · Apr 18, 1990
Commuting is one of the expenses that is so inherently personal that it cannot qualify for deductibility, irrespective of its role in the taxpayer’s trade or business. Moss v. … The cases considered by the Court of Appeals do not directly address the same issue or establish that respondent’s position was unreasonable. Christey v.
Cited 13 timesPublishedColorado State Bank of Walsh v. United States
18 Cl. Ct. 611 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 5, 1989
The document is an inventory that does not qualify as an independent appraisal by a qualified appraiser selected by the lender. … County supervisor Wysock clearly could not and did not “evaluate” a complete application. The Bank was responsible to see that all requirements for making the loan were satisfied.
Cited 15 timesPublishedCottingham v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 20, 2022
Thus, the Federal Circuit held that the Special Master abused his discretion because his decision rested on the clearly erroneous finding of fact that Petitioner had produced “no evidence” to support her claim. … fees was largely based on his finding 2 that Petitioner failed to present evidence to meet Althen prong two because she did not “file a statement from a treating doctor or qualified
Cited 0 timesPublishedCentury Exploration New Orleans, Inc. v. United States
103 Fed. Cl. 70 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 24, 2012
In that ease, Congress enacted legislation that repudiated the government’s obligation to make payments to veterans under earlier insurance contracts and also withdrew its waiver of sovereign immunity from suits related to … But it does undermine the government’s assertion that plaintiffs’ position in this case is clearly foreclosed by this court’s precedent. .
Cited 12 timesPublishedForte, Dupee, Sawyer Co. v. United States
56 Cust. Ct. 236 · United States Customs Court · Mar 21, 1966
The defendant’s witness Shlomm, while well qualified to testify concerning cashmeres, gave no testimony whatever concerning the exhibits before the court. Dr. … As hereinbefore pointed out, the evidence in this case clearly establishes that the merchandise is not a waste. If the imported fibers could, under the evidence, be held to be waste, still they definitely are not noils.
Cited 0 timesPublishedW. S. Badcock Corp. v. Commissioner
59 T.C. 272 · United States Tax Court · Nov 20, 1972
such method as, in the opinion of the Secretary * * * does clearly reflect income.” … of the Secretary or his delegate, does clearly reflect income.
Cited 11 timesPublishedCottingham v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 20, 2022
Thus, the Federal Circuit held that the Special Master abused his discretion because his decision rested on the clearly erroneous finding of fact that Petitioner had produced “no evidence” to support her claim. … His denial of fees was largely based on his finding that Petitioner failed to present evidence to meet Althen prong two because she did not “file a statement from a treating doctor or qualified expert indicating that the
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Tax Court · Feb 17, 2021
Clearly, sections 164 and 167 are limited by the exceptions in part IX, including section 280E. … - 24 - without established research departments to qualify for the deduction. Id.
Cited 0 timesPublishedSherwood Properties v. Commissioner
89 T.C. 651 · United States Tax Court · Sep 22, 1987
Either of the described exchanges may have also qualified as a recapitalization described in section 368(a)(1)(E). … However, the language of the regulation clearly indicates otherwise.
Cited 2 timesPublished27 I. & N. Dec. 8 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2017
The defendant in Grajeda asserted that a violation of section 245(a)(1) does not “require proof of sufficiently intentional conduct to qualify” as a crime of violence because, pursuant to Williams, “California’s definition … In that decision, the court additionally held that “Ceron does not clearly indicate a different interpretation of the mens rea requirement for § 245(a)(1) than that set forth in Grajeda.”
Cited 30 timesPublished44 Cust. Ct. 197 · United States Customs Court · May 4, 1960
The testimony of plaintiff’s witnesses established that this is a mosaic in color; that it is the work of Pablo Picasso; and that, in the opinion of witnesses qualified to express opinions as to artistic merit, it is an artistic … Nor is it necessary for us to question or qualify the basic doctrine of legislative adoption of judicial interpretation.
Cited 0 timesPublishedYuchi (Euchee) Tribe of Indians v. United States
145 F. Supp. 206 · United States Court of Claims · Oct 2, 1956
It is our opinion that in these conclusions the Commission was clearly right. … Their kinds of government approach the qualified monarchy.
Cited 5 timesPublishedUnited States Tax Court · Feb 17, 2021
Clearly, sections 164 and 167 are limited by the exceptions in part IX, including section 280E. … - 24 - without established research departments to qualify for the deduction. Id.
Cited 0 timesPublishedUnited States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 22, 2022
It is clearly, as articulated by the Fisher court, the lack of discretion contained in § 1201 that was the deciding factor. … such personnel and not to review and reverse decisions of other established boards favorable to such personnel.”
Cited 0 timesPublished807 F. Supp. 1571 · United States Court of International Trade · Nov 25, 1992
In light ... of these considerations, the ACA submits that the information qualifies for confidential treatment under 19 C.F.R. § 353.32 (a). ... In view of the ... … Whatever the particular responsibilities, the defendants and intervenor-defendant oppose grant of any stay, which can only occur when an applicant therefor establishes a threat of immediate irreparable harm, the likelihood
Cited 3 timesPublishedKerri Speights, Parent of Tyler Speights, a Minor v. Secretary of Health and Human Services 0
United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 17, 2013
Congress clearly considered, and rejected, this proposed exception. … established Congressional intent to reject a discovery rule.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna