Case law

Lsi Service Corporation v. United States

422 F.2d 1334 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 20, 1970

Sundstrand Turbo v. United States, 182 Ct.Cl. 31, 60 , 389 F.2d 406, 422-423 (1968). … See Sun Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. United States, 183 Ct.Cl. 358 , 393 F.2d 807 (1968).

MySpace, Inc. v. Donnell Mitchell

Trademark Trial and Appeal Board · May 11, 2009

v. Donnell Mitchell Before Seeherman, Rogers and Taylor, Administrative Trademark Judges. … plaintiff’s counsel, in direct violation of the Board’s order.

Rhodia Chemical Co. v. United States

12 Ct. Cust. 9 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 17, 1923

—Sullivan v. Haug ( 82 Mich. 548, 555 ); Messenger v. Teagan ( 106 Mich. 654, 658 ); State v. State Bank ( 137 Pac. Rep. 400 , 403); United States v. Loeb & Schoenfeld Co. ( 7 Ct. Cust. Appls. 380 ; T. … . — Dunterman v.

CALDERON-HERNANDEZ

25 I. & N. Dec. 885 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2012

Stuchiner, Esquire, Las Vegas, Nevada FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY: An Mai Nguyen, Assistant Chief Counsel BEFORE: Board Panel: MILLER and GREER, Board Members; KENDALL CLARK, Temporary Board Member. … Perez v. INS, 96 F.3d 390, 393 (9th Cir. 1996). Citing both Matter of Ige and Perez v.

Pender Peanut Corp. v. United States

20 Cl. Ct. 447 · United States Court of Claims · May 23, 1990

NLRB v. Brown, 380 U.S. 278, 291-92 , 85 S.Ct. 980, 988 , 13 L.Ed.2d 839 (1965). The starting point for determining the parameters of agency authority is the language of the enabling statute itself. Consumer Prod. … Consequently, the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) had authority to assess a penalty under § 128, the provision at issue. .

Saji & Kariya Co. v. United States

9 Ct. Cust. 78 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 25, 1919

Morrill v. Jones ( 106 U. S., 466 ). … In the proper exercise of that jurisdiction, therefore, the board rightly held .that the collector’s assessment was coriect under the law and the facts of the case. Greeley v. Thompson ( 51 U.

Norwest Corp. v. Commissioner

112 T.C. 89 · United States Tax Court · Mar 8, 1999

board. … See also DeFoe v. Board of Pub. Instruction, 132 F.2d 971 (5th Cir. 1943); Cannon v. Dixon, 115 F.2d 913 (4th Cir. 1940).

Dynalectron Corp.

199 Ct. Cl. 996 · United States Court of Claims · Sep 29, 1972

On the basis of the f oregoing, the court concludes that the decision of the Supreme Court in S & E Contractors, Inc. v. … United States v. Utah Constr. & Mining Co., 384 U.S. 394 (1966).

Dawnic Steamship Corp. v. United States

90 Ct. Cl. 537 · United States Court of Claims · Mar 4, 1940

The plaintiff contends that the statute of limitations did not commence to run until the Shipping Board had declined to resume consideration of its claims and in support of this contention cites the case of Smith v. … Under the allegations of the original petition and the first amended petition, the defendant requisitioned the respective hulls and the contracts for their completion, and under the rule laid down in the case of Omnia Co. v.

Philip J. Kerrigan v. Department of Labor

2015 MSPB 42 · Merit Systems Protection Board · Jun 11, 2015

Minor v. Merit Systems Protection Board, 819 F.2d 280, 283 (Fed. Cir. 1987); Miller v. U.S. Postal Service, 26 M.S.P.R. 210, 212-13 (1985). … See Clavin v. U.S. Postal Service, 99 M.S.P.R. 619, ¶ 4 (2005) (finding that the Board lacks jurisdiction to review a denial of workers’ compensation benefits); see also Lee v.

In Re Vickers

141 F.2d 522 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 6, 1944

In support of those views, the solicitor cites the case of Excelsior Drum Works v. … That holding was affirmed by the Board of Appeals.

D-STAR Engineering Corp.

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Apr 28, 2025

The Board consolidated the new appeal with ASBCA No. 61947. … Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc. v. United States, 728 F.3d 1348, 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (quoting Gen. Dynamics Corp. v. United States, 410 F.2d 404, 409 (Ct. Cl. 1969)).

Kurfess v. United States

169 Ct. Cl. 486 · United States Court of Claims · Feb 19, 1965

The Board recommended that he appear before a Naval Retiring Board. The Retiring Board affirmed the Survey Board’s findings and ordered plaintiff’s discharge for reason of physical disability. … In the absence of a clear showing that the Board acted arbitrarily or capriciously and therefore unlawfully we will not disturb its decision. Wales v. United States, 132 Ct. Cl. 765, 771 (1955); Boland v.

181004-480

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Apr 30, 2020

Hatlestad v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 524, 529 (1993). For VA purposes, the term “unemployability” is synonymous with an inability to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation. VAOPGPREC 75-91; 57 Fed. … See Van Hoose v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 361 (1993); see also Hodges v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 375 (1993); Blackburn v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 395 (1993).

Ranney v. Bridges

188 F.2d 588 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 10, 1951

Lenroot being the author of the opinion) in the case of Kear v. … The board deemed the instant case distinguishable from the Kear v. Roder case and, as we view the controversy, that constitutes the principal issue for our determination.

14-35 429

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Jun 4, 2018

Gabrielson v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 36, 39-40 (1994); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 57 (1990). … Rucker v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 67, 74 (1997); Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994).

Scratchley v. United States

96 Ct. Cl. 352 · United States Court of Claims · Jun 1, 1942

The sole question in the case is whether the plaintiff was retired May 27,1936 when the President approved the findings of the Board and its recommendation; or on August 1, 1936, the date recommended by the Board and the … Greenwald, Jr., v. The United States, 88 C. Cls. 264 , and Henry M. Butler v. The United States, 91 C. Cls. 88 , and other recent cases.

United States v. Zinn & Co.

2 Ct. Cust. 419 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 11, 1912

. *421 The Board of General Appraisers relied for its decision npon the two cases of Hempstead v. United States (168 Fed. Rep., 450), and Woodruff v. United States (168 Fed. Rep., 452). … The case is clearly in point to sustain the ruling of the board. The case of Woodruff v.

Johnson v. United States

123 Fed. Cl. 174 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 20, 2015

(ADRB) in 2002 and the Army Board [for] Correction [of] Military Records (ABCMR or board) in 2003, Mr. … Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 236 (1974), abrogated on other grounds by Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982); Reynolds v. Army & Air Force Exch. Serv., 846 F.2d 746, 747 (Fed. Cir. 1988).

Small v. United States

36 Fed. Cl. 43 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 8, 1996

Orloff v. Willoughby, 345 U.S. 83, 93 , 73 S.Ct. 534, 539-40 , 97 L.Ed. 842 (1953) (“judges are not given the task of running the Army.”). … Committee to Elect Lyndon La Rouche v.