Case law

State Trial Attorneys Ass'n v. Flournoy

522 F.2d 1406 · Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals · Aug 18, 1975

Indeed, California joined its employee plaintiffs in challenging the validity of Pay Board— CLC action limiting the employees’ pay increases. … United States v. California, 504 F.2d 750 (Em.App., 1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 1015 , 95 S.Ct. 2428 , 44 L.Ed.2d 684 (1975). The statement of this court in Carpenters 46 County Conference Board et al. v.

Columbia Iron & Metal Co. v. Commissioner

61 T.C. 5 · United States Tax Court · Oct 2, 1973

There shall also be attached to the return when filed a copy of the resolution of the board of directors authorizing the contribution. … See also Van Keppel v. United States, 206 F. Supp. 42 (D. Kan. 1962), affd. 321 F. 2d 717 (C.A. 10, 1963); Pearce v. United States, 226 F. Supp. 702 (W.D. K.Y. 1964).

Russo & Co. v. United States

11 Ct. Cust. 288 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 10, 1922

Upon this state of facts the Board of General Appraisers overruled the protest. … We note in this connection that in that opinion it is stated that the board relied upon T. D. 21785. The correct reference should have been instead to T. D. 21758. We do not find the cases of Smith & Co. v.

United States v. Field

7 Ct. Cust. 430 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 22, 1917

The foregoing decision of the board was affirmed by the United .'States Circuit Court, Northern District of California, and the case thereupon was appealed to this court, and is reported as United States v. … American Net & Twine Co. v. Worthington ( 141 U. S., 468 .)

Envistacom, LLC

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · Feb 19, 2025

Trading & Constr., ASBCA No. 63522, 24-1 BCA ¶ 38,528 at 187,289 (quoting ECC Int’l Constr., LLC v. Sec’y of Army, 79 F.4th 1364, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2023)). … Board Rule 17 states that “[w]henever the record discloses the failure of either party to file documents required by these Rules, respond to notices or correspondence from the Board, comply with orders of the Board, or otherwise

Garey v. Commissioner

16 B.T.A. 274 · United States Board of Tax Appeals · Apr 30, 1929

Again quoting from Noel v. … The petitioner attempts to distinguish Noel v.

United States v. General Electric Co.

4 Ct. Cust. 287 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 26, 1913

The articles in question are small pieces of Ceylon sapphire in the form of rough slabs, finished V or cup jewels, and are used as bearings for electrical meters or other delicate measuring instruments. … Chief reliance is placed upon the case of Dingelstedt v. United States ( 91 Fed., 112 ).

12-18 220

Board of Veterans' Appeals · Jun 30, 2015

See Moreau v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 389, 394 (1996). … See 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Mittleider v. West, 11 Vet. App. 181 (1998) citing Mitchem v. Brown, 9 Vet.

Cricket Hosiery, Inc. v. United States

429 F. Supp. 2d 1338 · United States Court of International Trade · Apr 24, 2006

United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739, 745 (1987); see also Rust v. … See Block v. N. Dak., 461 U.S. at 292 (citing Board of Regents v. Tomanio, 446 U.S. 478 (1980); Soriano v. United States, 352 U.S. 270 (1957)).

In re Fink

62 F.2d 103 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 19, 1932

D. 274, and Cohn v. United States Corset Co., 1877 C. D. 205.) … The board and the examiner both held that the purity of the product was merely a matter of degree.

Joseph E. Schmitz v. Office of Personnel Management

Merit Systems Protection Board · Jan 20, 2016

House v. Department of the Army, 98 M.S.P.R. 530, ¶ 9 (2005). The agency bears the burden to prove its compliance with a Board order. … Brown v. Office of Personnel Management, 113 M.S.P.R. 325, ¶ 5 (2010). ¶5 On September 21, 2015, OPM filed a submission purporting to show full compliance with this order. MSPB Docket No.

South Tacoma Motor Co. v. Commissioner

3 T.C. 411 · United States Tax Court · Mar 6, 1944

The first of these contentions must be rejected on the authority of Brown v. Helvering, 291 U. … Brown v. Helvering, supra. Refunds were made in South Dade Farms, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra. Petitioner -did not maintain a separate fund for these proceeds; they were kept in petitioner’s general bank account.

Fred A. Arnold, Inc. v. United States

35 Cont. Cas. Fed. 75,707 · United States Court of Claims · Aug 15, 1989

Consolidated Edison Company v. National Labor Relations Board, 305 U.S. 197, 229 , 59 S.Ct. 206, 217 , 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938). We proceed on that basis. … Inasmuch as the claims were before the Board on liability only, there is no authority in the court at this point to address the issue of quantum. United States v.

Parker v. Frilette

462 F.2d 544 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 13, 1972

Eurwits v. … See, Brinker v. Kray, Patent Appeal No. 8734, decided June 1, 1972. The board found Parker has not done SO' here, and we must agree.

Doe v. United States

35 Fed. Cl. 85 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 29, 1996

E.g., Adkins v. United States, 68 F.3d 1317, 1321 (Fed.Cir.1995); Sargisson v. United States, 913 F.2d 918, 920 (Fed.Cir. 1990); Voge v. United States, 844 F.2d 776, 779 (Fed.Cir.1988); Heisig v. … Orloff v. Willoughby, 345 U.S. 83, 90 , 73 S.Ct. 534, 538-39 , 97 L.Ed. 842 (1953); Maier v. Orr, 754 F.2d 973, 984 (Fed.Cir.1985); Brenner v.

200305-73405

Board of Veterans' Appeals · May 28, 2021

Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 159 (1993). The threshold for normal hearing is from 0 to 20 decibels, and higher threshold levels indicate some degree of hearing loss. Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. … See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (a)(2) (2017); Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370 (2002). Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994).

PINEDA

21 I. & N. Dec. 1017 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 1997

see also Hernandez-Rodriguez v. … INS, 376 U.S. 120, 128 (1964); Kessler v. Strecker, 307 U.S. 22, 30 (1939). As the Court stated in Costello v.

M-B-A

23 I. & N. Dec. 474 · Board of Immigration Appeals · Jul 1, 2002

See INS v. … Metropolitan Stevedore Co. v. Rambo, 521 U.S. 121, 137 (1997) (quoting Herman & MacLean v. Huddleston, 459 U.S. 375, 390 (1983)); see also Addington v. Texas, supra, at 423.

FloorPro, Inc. v. United States

94 Fed. Cl. 775 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 23, 2010

In June of 2009, the Federal Circuit vacated the Board’s decision and remanded the matter for dismissal. See Winter v. FloorPro, 570 F.3d 1367 (Fed.Cir. 2009). … See Alder Terrace, Inc. v. United States, 161 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed.Cir.1998). The Government relies on the rule established in Brighton Village Assoc. v.

Martin v. Department of the Air Force

227 Ct. Cl. 742 · United States Court of Claims · May 22, 1981

Alonzo v. Department of the Air Force, No. DA075209013; Coefield v. Department of the Navy, No. SF07509012; and Russell v. Department of the Interior, No. SF075209018. … The Board refused the appeal because of failure to meet these criteria.