Source: http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/aggregator/sources/8?page=153
Timestamp: 2018-03-20 15:40:53
Document Index: 125163190

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1292', '§ 1292', '§ 1505', '§ 1500', '§ 8306', '§ 1', '§ 631', '§ 2382', '§ 644', '§ 2305', '§ 16', '§ 207', '§ 216', '§ 6226', '§ 1', '§ 1', '§ 2412', '§ 605', '§ 2', '§ 601', '§ 1346', '§ 1491']

Attorney-Client Privilege; Attorney Work-Product Privilege; Fed. R. Ev. 612; Motion for Reconsideration, RCFC 59(a)(1) Signed by Judge Braden.
Jurisdiction; Motion to Dismiss, RCFC 12(b)(1) Signed by Judge Braden.
Attorney-Client Privilege;Attorney Work-Product Privilege;Certification,28 U.S.C. § § 1292(b),(d)(2); Deliberative Process Privilege;Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982,28 U.S.C. § 1292(d)(2);Interlocutory Appeal;Mandamus;"Misconduct Exception" to the Attorney-Client Privilege Signed by Judge Braden.
95-524C • HOMER J. HOLLAND, STEVEN BANGERT, Co-Executor of the Estate of HOWARD R. ROSS, v. THE UNITED STATES,
Winstar-related proceeding, damages for breach of contract, Financial Institutions Reform,Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989(FIRREA), expectation damages, reasonable foreseeability of damages, breach of contract as substantial causal factor in bank's diminution in economic value, reasonable certainty of damages, fair and reasonable approximation of amount of damages, measure of damages for loss of income-producing asset, no damages resulting from hypothetical capital-aising transaction, Gordon growth model Signed by Judge Miller, G..
01-669C • BENJAMIN & SHAKI ALLI AND BSA CORPORATION, v. THE UNITED STATES,
Trial; Breach of contract; Section 8 housing program; Housing Assistant Payments contracts and associated regulatory agreements; Requirement that owner maintain decent, safe and sanitary housing for tenants;HUD properly determined that properties in question were not maintained in a decent, safe and sanitary fashion; HUD did not commit contract breaches in suspending and terminating HAP contracts and regulatory agreements; HUD did not breach contract provisions regarding transfer of property;Counterclaim; Plaintiffs breached HAP contracts and associated agreements;Corporate veil pierced Signed by Judge Allegra.
96-408C • INNOVAIR AVIATION, LTD v. THE UNITED STATES,
Fifth Amendment, Takings, Damages; Just Compensation; Discount Rate; Interest; Present Value Calculation; Discounted Cash Flow Signed by Judge Smith.
06-910L • NEZ PERCE TRIBE, v. UNITED STATES,
Indian trust claims brought under the Indian Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1505;subject matter jurisdiction circumscribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1500; same-day filings;effect of time of filing during day Signed by Judge Lettow.
05-965C • CEBE FARMS, IND., and JOSEPH CEBE, v. THE UNITED STATES,
Fifth Amendment Takings Claim; RCFC 12(c); Judgment on the Pleadings; Exotic Newcastle Disease in Livestock; 7 U.S.C. § 8306 (2000); Motion to Amend; RCFC 15 Signed by Judge Sweeney.
05-297C • STERLING, WINCHESTER & LONG, L.L.C., v. THE UNITED STATES,
Trademark license agreement; contract interpretation; parol evidence; integration clause Signed by Judge Margolis.
Fifth Amendment; Takings; Police Power;Motion for Reconsideration; Innocent Owner; Evidence for Criminal Prosecution Signed by Judge Smith.
08-101C • L-3 GLOBAL COMMUNICATIONS SOLUTIONS, INC., v. THE UNITED STATES,
Post-Award Bid Protest; Responsiveness Depends on a Bid's Facial Compliance with Material Requirements of the Solicitation; Elements of Proof for a "Bait and Switch" Challenge; Awardee's Rejected Proposal for Post-Award Contract Signed by Judge Bush.
08-94C • TYLER CONSTR. GROUP, v. THE UNITED STATES,
Contractsâ€”Bid Protest: (i) The use of an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contract to acquire construction services constitutes a permissible exercise of the procurement authority under the FAR § 1.102(d);(ii) 15 U.S.C. § § 631(j), 644; 10 U.S.C. § 2382(a)â€”Restrictions against bundling of contract requirements,even if applicable to general construction work, do not apply when, on the basis of comprehensive advice provided by the construction industry, the procuring agency determines bundling to be necessary and justified; (iii) 15 U.S.C. § 644 noteâ€”The procuring agency is not required to seek a waiver of statutory restrictions barring set-asides for general small business concerns when the agency's needs require participation by contractors that are able to support construction projects generally exceeding small business revenue standards; (iv) 10 U.S.C. § 2305(a)â€”Statutory two-phase design/build selection procedures are not restricted to acquisitions involving a single structure or group of structures at a single location, nor do they require the award of three or more contracts;(v) FAR § § 16.504(a)(3), 36.204â€”The procuring agency did not overstate its needs to the detriment of the ability of small businesses to participate in the solicitation when the regulations barred disclosure of the government price estimate and task orders were identified in terms of minimum and maximum dollar values Signed by Judge Wiese.
05-1043C • JORGE A. DELPIN APONTE, et al., v. THE UNITED STATES,
United States Postal Service; Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1)(overtime compensation); Territorial Cost of Living Adjustment(TCOLA); regular rate; RCFC 15(a)motion to amend; undue prejudice; futility; opt-in class action under RCFC 23; collective action under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) Signed by Judge Wolski.
07-625T • KISLEV PARTNERS, L.P., by and through NESIM BAHAR, a Partner Other than the Tax Matters Partner, v. THE UNITED STATES,
Jurisdiction; Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982; Notice of Final Partnership Administrative Adjustment; 26 U.S.C. § 6226(e)(1); Statutory Interpretation; 1 U.S.C. § 1; Amount of Requisite Deposit;Good Faith Effort to Comply; Timing for Correction of Shortfall in Deposit Signed by Judge Williams.
07-829C • MATHEW LEVY, v. UNITED STATES
Military Pay; Jurisdiction; Statute of Limitations; Equitable Tolling Signed by Judge Horn.
07-209T • IMPRIMIS INVESTORS LLC, WEXFORD SPECIAL SITUATIONS 1997 INSTITUTIONAL, L.P., TAX MATTERS PARTNER, v. UNITED STATES,
Federal Tax Dispute; Definition of "Ordinary Income"; Short Term Capital Gains; I.R.S. Inconsistent Positions; Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA); Partner's Distributive Share; 26 U.S.C. § § 1, 64, 702, 703, 1222,6226; Settlement Agreement Signed by Judge Horn.
01-680C • JGB ENTERPRISES, INC., v. THE UNITED STATES,
Motion for attorneys' fees and expenses under the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d); Government's position lacked substantial justification; effect of claim on which plaintiff did not prevail; alleged duplication of effort by attorneys; cost-of-living adjustment to cap on hourly rates; fees attributable to work of paralegals and other nonlawyers Signed by Judge Miller, G..
08-3C • KENNEY ORTHOPEDIC, LLC, v. THE UNITED STATES,
Certification, 41 U.S.C. § 605(c)(1);Claim, 48 C.F.R. § 2.101;Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C. § § 601, et seq.;Federal Torts Claims Act,28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)1);Jurisdiction; Motion To Dismiss, RCFC 12(b)(1);Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491 Signed by Judge Braden.
08-385C • JOHN BRAMLETT WADE, III, v. THE UNITED STATES,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction; Pro se Plaintiff; Maritime Jurisdiction; Rule 12(b)(1);Tort Claims; Due Process Claims;Equal Protection Claims Signed by Judge Smith.
07-392C • PETER MATHIS, JR., v. THE UNITED STATES,
Motion to Dismiss; RCFC 12(b);Pro se Plaintiff; Tort Claims;Statute of Limitations;Injunctive Relief; Constitutional Claims Signed by Judge Smith.