Legal Opinion
Rowe v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided July 17, 1964No. 256-60PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam :
This case was referred pursuant to Eule 45 (since April 1,1964 Eule 57) to Trial Commissioner Mastín G. White, with directions to make findings of fact and recommendations for conclusion of law. The Commissioner has done so and has written an opinion with which we agree *470and which, we adopt with minor modifications. This case differs from Sofranoff v. United States, 165 Ct. Cl. 470 (1964), in that the pertinent regulations were not followed in that case, whereas they were followed in the present case. Plaintiff is, therefore, not entitled to recover, and his petition is dismissed.
Th…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Service v. DullesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Vitarelli v. SeatonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Baltimore National Bank v. State Tax CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Robert O. Bland v. John D. Connally, Secretary of the Navy, and IndividuallyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1961
- Fannie Mae Clackum v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1960
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Austin v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1975
- Casey v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1985
- Keef v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1968
- Garrett v. LehmanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Flowers v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2008
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.