Legal Opinion
Kanehl v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided March 23, 1998No. Cong. Ref. No. 93-647XPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REPORT OF THE REVIEW PANEL
YOCK, Judge.
In this congressional reference case, the review panel addresses the plaintiff’s challenge to the report of the hearing officer, which concluded that an award to the plaintiff would be a gratuity. The plaintiff’s exceptions to the hearing officer’s report have been briefed, and oral arguments were heard on January 22, 1998. The review panel has carefully considered the entire record, including the plaintiff’s exceptions, and adopts the hearing officer’s report.1 The panel advises Congress that any award to the plaintiff would constitute a gratuity.
Factual…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. WeintraubSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- The United States v. Johnson Controls, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Astron Industrial Associates, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1968
- Thomas A. Vincel v. White Motor Corporation and Glenn F. KommerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Land Grantors in Henderson, Union v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Land Grantors in Henderson, Union v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- J.L. Simmons Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- Thomas Charles Bear v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013